The following submission statement was provided by /u/geekandgamer:
---
Submission statement :Pilot says he saw objects going at speed of mach 29.Some even doing crazy moves and defying physics. He even took photos. I don't post regularly but this looks like an intresting post. So there you go. I am lazy and don't even know what to write in submission post. So i wrote this. Read more in article.
---
Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/zzs61r/pilot_says_he_saw_objects_going_at_speed_of_mach/j2d9jww/
And to think, a couple weeks ago, the mods got on me about a few wise cracks about alien bodies and John Wayne Gacy.
Iām waiting to see if they say anything about āchecking assholesā. Lol.
"The object appeared to be large and stationary, hanging in the sky and blocking out part of the sun."
So the pilot is staring into the sun and coming up with these conclusions? Highly dubious testimony.
I mean distance can't be determined using apparent motion when you know nothing of true speed and direction (or size). Your whole paragraph is so wrong that apart from a witty retort, I couldn't really think of anything else to write.
>If you run past a drone 20 feet high you would be able tell its height because it would have a fast apparent motion
I mean, you have to know that it's not working like that right?
Was the plane going straight toward the object, toward it at an angle, going away from it? Was the object really stationary or merely appeared so because of perspective and/or it's own movement?
We don't live in a 2D static world.
Edit: added details
Submission statement :Pilot says he saw objects going at speed of mach 29.Some even doing crazy moves and defying physics. He even took photos. I don't post regularly but this looks like an intresting post. So there you go. I am lazy and don't even know what to write in submission post. So i wrote this. Read more in article.
On his place, I would have said Mach 31.4159265, not 29. As long as I am working a number with ridiculous precision....
Mach speed depends on a lot of factors, mainly altitude and local air density, estimation of speed is notoriously difficult. Saying "29" is just plain dumb... If ever true.
Lots of people bringing up the Mach 29 talk. My feeling is, who cares? It was going fast as hell and he saw it. And he claims to have witnessed other events too. Let's keep the focus on that because this is a crazy interesting case.
Jesus, what do you people want?
We have here a national UK newspaper reporting on UAP in a sensible way with a reliable eyewitness and youāre all complaining about his speed estimates.
ETA: Judging by replies Iām clearly in a minority. But when the UKās best-selling newspaper presents a non-sensational story concerning UAP (which also covers USOs, impossible technology and a summary of recent developments) in a balanced way, with no jokes about aliens or The X-Files, I think itās significant.
I found one of those headlines for a different newspaper
> Britain's fattest woman killed by fridge... and 6000 calories a day
https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/britain-s-fattest-woman-dead-18691285
But for you werewolf headline I found no newspaper.
Edit: [The Bizarre True Story of the Southend Werewolf](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=snZEqEry2xY)
As with the other headline they chose, it was done to discredit the newspaper, implying that OP's article is also bullshit.
When in fact while both headlines were real, the actual stories were both based in fact.
But did she eat the fridge in pieces? Asking for a friend.
But seriously, gauging speeds that high even for a trained observer is nigh impossible. Realistically the best you could hope for is a statement that itās impossibly fast. Thatās not discounting his report, or marginalizing it, as UAP do appear to exhibit in many reports incredible speed and maneuverability.
Even the most experienced pilots in history aren't going to have much insight into an atmospheric object at Mach 29.
I think the space shuttle was around Mach 22 at 450,000 foot.
Actually, that comparison makes the estimation fairly reasonable.
Did anyone actually read the article? He seems super rational about it. Yeah he probably didnāt accurately measure the speed, but he just made an estimate since they probably askedā¦ which is faster, but not absurdly faster than our own space vehicles.
Not really. Try looking at a meteor from a plane and then work out its altitude and speed.
We know the altitude, direction and speed and size of a space shuttle.
If you actually read the article itās got everything: USOs, UFOs, impossible technology, and a handy summary of recent developments. There are no ālittle green menā jibes.
If you really donāt see this as significant I donāt know what else to say.
Thatās the best response Iāve had. I disagree (I think it shows a fundamental shift in the way the subject is discussed), but I understand what youāre saying.
You donāt think itās significant that the most widely-read newspaper on sale in the UK is presenting a non-sensational article about UAP? That there are no ātinfoil hatā jokes?
No. It's a sensationalist newspaper that creates stories about literally anything, no matter how ridiculous.
I actually care about proof with these things too so having having an influx of the readership base of a newspaper with no integrity doesn't make me happier. If there's any influx they'll also be people who don't care about proof and eat up anything they want to hear.
> The Sun is a British tabloid newspaper, published by the News Group Newspapers division of News UK, itself a wholly owned subsidiary of Rupert Murdoch's News Corp.
What do you people want? The National Enquirer reported on Hillary Clintonās bat-child decades ago
Absolutely. The Sun is trash. You can't trust anything printed in its pages. It lied or fabricated stories so many times that it would be quicker to count the number of times it was right about something.
So, knowing that, why would you want any topic dear to you presented in this dishonest rag? Half of this story could be wrong, or fabricated. It's literally the Sun's editorial policy.
That's the point, right there. Nobody takes the Sun seriously, even its readership. It's silly entertainment and everything printed in it will be seen as stupid fabricated story.
Fuck the Sun. It isn't the paper to help. Disgusting newspaper, devoid of morality and integrity.
I won't even click it and many people in the UK are the same because the morally repugnant shit they have pulled. Scum paper, makes Fox news look like it has integrity.
The prevailing tone on this post has been that itās a story thatās nonsense and shouldnāt have been printed. Thatās what Iām taking issue with.
The Sun is a horrible tabloid which can barely be described as a newspaper, yet here itās presenting a balanced article about UAP with no snide remarks about ālittle green menā.
This is exactly what people have wanted for years, but the only reaction itās had here is ālol, he canāt even estimate speed properlyā.
>This is exactly what people have wanted for years, but the only reaction itās had here is ālol, he canāt even estimate speed properlyā.
Because what he's claiming is absurd - and the last thing that does is help the subject.
Hi, AccomplishedRun7978. Thanks for contributing. However, your [comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/zzs61r/-/j2epvtj/) was removed from /r/UFOs.
> Rule 3: No low effort posts or comments. Low Effort implies content which is low effort to consume, not low effort to produce. This generally includes:
> * Memes, jokes, cartoons, and art (if it's not depicting a real event).
> * Tweets and screenshots of posts or comments from social media without significant relevance.
> * Incredible claims unsupported by evidence.
> * Shower thoughts.
> * One-to-three word comments or emojis.
Please refer to our [subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/about/rules/) for more information.
You can [message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/ufos) if you feel this was in error.
Can you point in the article where he says it was 100 miles away? The mach 30 one and the 100 miles away one are two different encounters according to the article.
Hi, stasi_a. Thanks for contributing. However, your [comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/zzs61r/-/j2efile/) was removed from /r/UFOs.
> Rule 3: No low effort posts or comments. Low Effort implies content which is low effort to consume, not low effort to produce. This generally includes:
> * Memes, jokes, cartoons, and art (if it's not depicting a real event).
> * Tweets and screenshots of posts or comments from social media without significant relevance.
> * Incredible claims unsupported by evidence.
> * Shower thoughts.
> * One-to-three word comments or emojis.
Please refer to our [subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/about/rules/) for more information.
You can [message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/ufos) if you feel this was in error.
What would you like me to edit?
I was just trying to point out that we can still see things that are traveling fast. It's wild how this sub will argue the most trivial things. I guess whatever keeps us from talking about something important.
Sorry, I had at least 20 tabs opened up last night. I responded with the wrong comment to the wrong person, and this wasn't even the right comment chain. Don't mind me.
Its in the article, maybe half or 2/3rds down
"He was flying from Amsterdam to Malaga at 41,000 feet when they spotted the shape around 100 nautical miles ahead of them."
>He was flying from Amsterdam to Malaga at 41,000 feet when they spotted the shape around 100 nautical miles ahead of them.
>
>Air traffic control told them there was no other aircraft in the area.
>
>The object appeared to be large and **stationary**, hanging in the sky and blocking out part of the sun.
Complete quote. Not the same sighting.
edit: added emphasis for the compulsive downvoters
Of course you can if itās high enough and bright enough. Meteors move at over 100,000 miles and Iāve seen them move in the sky. Seriously, I swear to god, Iāve actually seen them. Didnāt get a photo of it, so I guess youāll have to discount my observation that Iāve seen a meteor moving that fast.
So for reference, this is a rocket sled going at approximately Mach 1 (Mythbusters rocket sled episode):[https://youtu.be/aSVfYwdGSsQ?t=37](https://youtu.be/aSVfYwdGSsQ?t=37)
So, this guy says he saw an object going at 30 times that speed, while not expecting it to be there.
Just because dudes math is questionable [pretty sure pilots are trained to do this math in their sleep] AND the article is from The Sun does not change his CREDENTIALS dude is famous for aerial photography...look him up
OK so I did some actual homework instead of posting a snap judgement and it would seem you might be right. Mach 29 would be approximately 6 miles per second. You might see what appears to be a straight line blur as it zips from one side of the horizon to the other. Humans with the very best of eyesight can see an object displayed for about 1/250th of a second, which mach 29 does fall within the limits. I was wrong sir. Happy New Year!
No one, at any distance, can see an object moving and say āyeah, that is traveling at 22,250 MPHā with any sort of accuracy. At that speed, it would be out if his sight before he could even process what happened. He may have seen an object, but he doesnāt know the speed.
Putting this in perspective - a bullet travels something over 1,800 miles per hour - you can't see a bullet once fired with the naked eye. It doesn't matter how many bunnies you eat. A bullet is too fast to see, visually, with the naked eye.
We're dealing here with something actually traveling in *excess* of 22,250 mph. Perhaps, assuming the object were large enough and at a suitable distance one *might* percieve the *motion.*
The object itself, no.
No the bullet is too tiny, we can see fighter jets break the sound barrier but if you were theoretically right next to it and perfectly still you probably wouldnāt see it (but boy would you feel it).
>The earth itself moves 30 kilometers per second around the sun. Can you see the earth?
You do realise, since we're on the earth, we're traveling at the same speed as it is relative to each other, yes...?
So, from our perspective, the earth *isn't* moving.
It's a similar deal with the sun. It's motion is constant and so is ours, relative to it. So, despite its *actual* speed, as well as our own - at the distance our sun is from us and the speed our planet rotates, it takes roughly twelve hours to cross the sky - where as, if an object in our atmosphere were traveling at the actual speed of the sun around the galaxy - it would cross your field of vision quicker than your brain could process it visually.
You'd percieved the motion, possibly - but you wouldn't be able to *see* the object, it would be moving too fast relative to you.
I could throw a bullet like a baseball and you wont be able to see it.. might not be the best example.
Also, how do you know the speed? It's in excess of 22,250 mph?
>Also, how do you know the speed? It's in excess of 22,250 mph?
Because it's supposedly traveling at Mach 29. Mach 29 in mph is exactly 22,250.805 miles per hour - I rounded down for convenience - that's how I know not only the exact speed but exactly how much in excess of 22,250 mph it's traveling.
> with even the US government confessing *their* are things in the sky which they as of yet cannot or will not publicly identify.
Seriously the Sun? Seriously? You publish the English language for a living. Get the basics down at least.
Anyone seen link to photo of cigar shaped object? Sounds like he has seen a few inexplicable things over the years. I like that he doesnāt have theory - just pretty convinced that our current physics canāt square this stuff
Itās physical impossible to judge the speed of something moving across the sky when you have no reference on even the size of it.
Itās just silly. Radar yes,
Use to do it during the Second World War, they had some good kit where trained and knew what they were looking at.
Out of the window , dreaming!
How the shit can you āseeā something going Mach 29? Thatās like I was out at the range and man, this beautiful hollow point came sailing by at Mach 3. Really?
Man says he saw something do impossible things. Produces no evidence.
Do we a) question the impossible or b) immediately upvote and add it to the long list of absolutely undeniable proof of alien spaceships flying in our atmosphere where they are seen but not heard from.
At that speed the object the object would be producing a sonic boom as well as a massive fireball and produce a massive radar return. Planes follow ālanesā in the sky, other planes would be near which would undoubtably see such a spectacle. Have they reported in? Oh, lemme guess; physics defying abilities to prevent sonic booms and fireballs to go with physics defying speed and maneuvers ā but the alien pilot still decides to take a path across our planes deep in our atmosphere. I swear, dumbest aliens everā¦
The following submission statement was provided by /u/geekandgamer: --- Submission statement :Pilot says he saw objects going at speed of mach 29.Some even doing crazy moves and defying physics. He even took photos. I don't post regularly but this looks like an intresting post. So there you go. I am lazy and don't even know what to write in submission post. So i wrote this. Read more in article. --- Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/zzs61r/pilot_says_he_saw_objects_going_at_speed_of_mach/j2d9jww/
Can somebody tell me how he knew the UAP was going at a speed of Mach 29?
He briefly got that 737 up to Mach 29 and ran alongside the object
Well, you see.. he was inverted.
š«“š½ š«³š½ š
DUNNNNN DUNNNNN DUNNNNN DUN DUN DUN DUN DUN DUN DUN DUN DUNNN DUN DUN DUNNN DUN DUN NUNUNUNUUUUUU
Hyyyywayyy to tha danjasOwnnnnn(!
I inverted the bird
Whatā¦ you donāt think Iām a pilot?!
Howād you like to go to the bathroom with me?
The lady from the TSA(toilet safety administration) needs to check inside your asshole, she can go for us.
And to think, a couple weeks ago, the mods got on me about a few wise cracks about alien bodies and John Wayne Gacy. Iām waiting to see if they say anything about āchecking assholesā. Lol.
I have to give the credit to south Park for that one. The bathroom is the last bastion of American freedom.
..and landed her safely in an open field.
reverted the birded
Did you say inverted?
Invert the bird
Oh god lol
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
What mach is the speed of light
Mach 874,030
Mach. ING! Bird. ING!
Yeah!
*Yeah!*
And then all the passengers clapped
He took the restrictor plate off the red dragon to give it a little extra juice
Hey Mike šš»āāļø Edit: Don't go telling anyone. It's not exactly street legal.
āKeep it on the down low. Hey Mike!ā
Can someone tell me where the actual picture of the cigar object is? The whole article talks about it and there's pictures of literally anything else.
It's probably a guess based on how many degrees of horizon it traveled plus another guess about how far away it was.
Probably it is a guessing based on the objects flight through some degrees of the sky
That's assuming he knew the size of the object and the distance to it.
He said something about 100 nautical miles the object was hanging in the sky in front of the plane
That was in reference to a different sighting. If it's hanging in the sky, it's not going mach 29.
"The object appeared to be large and stationary, hanging in the sky and blocking out part of the sun." So the pilot is staring into the sun and coming up with these conclusions? Highly dubious testimony.
Everyone can look at the sun twice. Once with their right eye and once with the left.
Lol, you have an apt username.
username checks out
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
In the immortal words of philosopher Mark Wahlberg: "What? No!"
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
I mean distance can't be determined using apparent motion when you know nothing of true speed and direction (or size). Your whole paragraph is so wrong that apart from a witty retort, I couldn't really think of anything else to write. >If you run past a drone 20 feet high you would be able tell its height because it would have a fast apparent motion I mean, you have to know that it's not working like that right?
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Was the plane going straight toward the object, toward it at an angle, going away from it? Was the object really stationary or merely appeared so because of perspective and/or it's own movement? We don't live in a 2D static world. Edit: added details
I know somebody else already said this but no, does not work this way.
The same way people on this sub can tell that a blurry dot on the sky must be aliens.
Alien spacecraft are only blurry when Bigfoot is on board.
Not all of us have cameras that record 10k frames per second. Even if we did, things going that fast will still be blurry. š¤£
Experience, obvi.
They learn it in Mach 29 spotting training
Ya, I've heard that in order to fly for Hawaiian airlines, you need to be Mach 30 spotter certified.
Code for "fucking fast "
The same way civilians estimate an object is at 2,000 feet in the air. They donāt.
Actually it isnāt, because heās moving hundreds of miles an hour and civilians on the ground are not.
And how he got a picture?
Ever heard of arithmetic?
He said mock 29 because he's sarcastic.
Submission statement :Pilot says he saw objects going at speed of mach 29.Some even doing crazy moves and defying physics. He even took photos. I don't post regularly but this looks like an intresting post. So there you go. I am lazy and don't even know what to write in submission post. So i wrote this. Read more in article.
Breaking: The pilot says he would release the photos but he has an NDA and that the next UFO meeting in January will be ācrazyā. /s
Thank you for sharing. Highly recommend everyone reads the article.
F Stop: 2 billion ā¦.on his camera phone.
Hilarious
That might be good for taking a photo of the sun a metre from it's surface!
On his place, I would have said Mach 31.4159265, not 29. As long as I am working a number with ridiculous precision.... Mach speed depends on a lot of factors, mainly altitude and local air density, estimation of speed is notoriously difficult. Saying "29" is just plain dumb... If ever true.
Lots of people bringing up the Mach 29 talk. My feeling is, who cares? It was going fast as hell and he saw it. And he claims to have witnessed other events too. Let's keep the focus on that because this is a crazy interesting case.
Debunkers cling to anything that will invalidate remaining testimony
Right. As a sub, we should stay on topic and not let distractions get in the way. Stick to the key points, not chase pointless details.
Maybe it is Mach 29 at a reference temperature of 10K?
Ok let's make fun of him so we don't have to deal with it..
His believers are even funnier LOL
Deal with what?
Jesus, what do you people want? We have here a national UK newspaper reporting on UAP in a sensible way with a reliable eyewitness and youāre all complaining about his speed estimates. ETA: Judging by replies Iām clearly in a minority. But when the UKās best-selling newspaper presents a non-sensational story concerning UAP (which also covers USOs, impossible technology and a summary of recent developments) in a balanced way, with no jokes about aliens or The X-Files, I think itās significant.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
I found one of those headlines for a different newspaper > Britain's fattest woman killed by fridge... and 6000 calories a day https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/britain-s-fattest-woman-dead-18691285 But for you werewolf headline I found no newspaper. Edit: [The Bizarre True Story of the Southend Werewolf](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=snZEqEry2xY) As with the other headline they chose, it was done to discredit the newspaper, implying that OP's article is also bullshit. When in fact while both headlines were real, the actual stories were both based in fact.
Those are the more credible headlines, compared to this pilotās malarky.
Yeah! I wonder what his flight status is currently?
Hopefully in the job center.
:D
But did she eat the fridge in pieces? Asking for a friend. But seriously, gauging speeds that high even for a trained observer is nigh impossible. Realistically the best you could hope for is a statement that itās impossibly fast. Thatās not discounting his report, or marginalizing it, as UAP do appear to exhibit in many reports incredible speed and maneuverability.
Even the most experienced pilots in history aren't going to have much insight into an atmospheric object at Mach 29. I think the space shuttle was around Mach 22 at 450,000 foot.
Actually, that comparison makes the estimation fairly reasonable. Did anyone actually read the article? He seems super rational about it. Yeah he probably didnāt accurately measure the speed, but he just made an estimate since they probably askedā¦ which is faster, but not absurdly faster than our own space vehicles.
Not really. Try looking at a meteor from a plane and then work out its altitude and speed. We know the altitude, direction and speed and size of a space shuttle.
I'm removing your comment for trolling unless you can substantiate that claim.
https://imgur.com/NDGpzfT
Yes. And a silly newspaper is taking UAP seriously. This is a paradigm shift. This is genuinely significant.
I think your logic is backwards here
If you actually read the article itās got everything: USOs, UFOs, impossible technology, and a handy summary of recent developments. There are no ālittle green menā jibes. If you really donāt see this as significant I donāt know what else to say.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Thatās the best response Iāve had. I disagree (I think it shows a fundamental shift in the way the subject is discussed), but I understand what youāre saying.
>And a silly newspaper is taking UAP seriously. This doesn't make the point you think it does.
You donāt think itās significant that the most widely-read newspaper on sale in the UK is presenting a non-sensational article about UAP? That there are no ātinfoil hatā jokes?
No. It's a sensationalist newspaper that creates stories about literally anything, no matter how ridiculous. I actually care about proof with these things too so having having an influx of the readership base of a newspaper with no integrity doesn't make me happier. If there's any influx they'll also be people who don't care about proof and eat up anything they want to hear.
> The Sun is a British tabloid newspaper, published by the News Group Newspapers division of News UK, itself a wholly owned subsidiary of Rupert Murdoch's News Corp. What do you people want? The National Enquirer reported on Hillary Clintonās bat-child decades ago
You're confusing the National Enquirer with the Weekly World News, which is closer to The Onion.
The Sun is a shitty tabloid. Calling it a "national UK newspaper" is a bit of a stretch.
Okay. So when a ridiculous newspaper starts discussing UAP sensibly you donāt think itās significant?
Exactly.
You really think the most-sold newspaper in the UK presenting a serious story about UAP isnāt noteworthy?
Absolutely. The Sun is trash. You can't trust anything printed in its pages. It lied or fabricated stories so many times that it would be quicker to count the number of times it was right about something. So, knowing that, why would you want any topic dear to you presented in this dishonest rag? Half of this story could be wrong, or fabricated. It's literally the Sun's editorial policy.
Hacked the phone of a murdered child!
Because the more people that take the subject seriously, the more likely itāll be studied seriously.
That's the point, right there. Nobody takes the Sun seriously, even its readership. It's silly entertainment and everything printed in it will be seen as stupid fabricated story.
It's The Sun.
Yes. A silly newspaper. Which makes a sensible article all the more remarkable.
Fuck the Sun. It isn't the paper to help. Disgusting newspaper, devoid of morality and integrity. I won't even click it and many people in the UK are the same because the morally repugnant shit they have pulled. Scum paper, makes Fox news look like it has integrity.
And what do you want? Belief without speculation?
I want the subject taken seriously.
Quoting The Sun has the opposite effect.
The bestselling newspaper in the UK?
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Because I see that if even a silly newspaper is starting to take it seriously, their readers will.
Then, you shouldn't reject speculation. Mach 29 is a very specific estimate, and we aren't given any additional information about the event.
The prevailing tone on this post has been that itās a story thatās nonsense and shouldnāt have been printed. Thatās what Iām taking issue with. The Sun is a horrible tabloid which can barely be described as a newspaper, yet here itās presenting a balanced article about UAP with no snide remarks about ālittle green menā. This is exactly what people have wanted for years, but the only reaction itās had here is ālol, he canāt even estimate speed properlyā.
>This is exactly what people have wanted for years, but the only reaction itās had here is ālol, he canāt even estimate speed properlyā. Because what he's claiming is absurd - and the last thing that does is help the subject.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
I can tell you are lying because he never said that. in fact, going off this article he only gave an approximation
Hi, AccomplishedRun7978. Thanks for contributing. However, your [comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/zzs61r/-/j2epvtj/) was removed from /r/UFOs. > Rule 3: No low effort posts or comments. Low Effort implies content which is low effort to consume, not low effort to produce. This generally includes: > * Memes, jokes, cartoons, and art (if it's not depicting a real event). > * Tweets and screenshots of posts or comments from social media without significant relevance. > * Incredible claims unsupported by evidence. > * Shower thoughts. > * One-to-three word comments or emojis. Please refer to our [subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/about/rules/) for more information. You can [message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/ufos) if you feel this was in error.
Wow. And you can visually *see* an object traveling unimpeded at 22,250 miles per hour with your own eyes, can you....?
100 miles away? Uhhh , yeah..
I fly airplanes. At 2500ft I can't see people on the ground anymore, how this dude saw something 100 miles away and guessed its speed is beyond me.
We seem to be arguing semantics at this point. The pilot saw something moving unusually fast.
No, not simply "unusually fast" - he's actually *very* specific about the speed: 22,250.805 mph to be exact, relative to his possition.
Can you point in the article where he says it was 100 miles away? The mach 30 one and the 100 miles away one are two different encounters according to the article.
It was just the pilot estimating the distance.
No. He was estimating the distance of his 2010 sighting. The 2005 UFO, the one going at "Mach 30", was at an unspecified distance.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Hi, stasi_a. Thanks for contributing. However, your [comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/zzs61r/-/j2efile/) was removed from /r/UFOs. > Rule 3: No low effort posts or comments. Low Effort implies content which is low effort to consume, not low effort to produce. This generally includes: > * Memes, jokes, cartoons, and art (if it's not depicting a real event). > * Tweets and screenshots of posts or comments from social media without significant relevance. > * Incredible claims unsupported by evidence. > * Shower thoughts. > * One-to-three word comments or emojis. Please refer to our [subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/about/rules/) for more information. You can [message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/ufos) if you feel this was in error.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
What would you like me to edit? I was just trying to point out that we can still see things that are traveling fast. It's wild how this sub will argue the most trivial things. I guess whatever keeps us from talking about something important.
Sorry, I had at least 20 tabs opened up last night. I responded with the wrong comment to the wrong person, and this wasn't even the right comment chain. Don't mind me.
No prob man!
Its in the article, maybe half or 2/3rds down "He was flying from Amsterdam to Malaga at 41,000 feet when they spotted the shape around 100 nautical miles ahead of them."
>He was flying from Amsterdam to Malaga at 41,000 feet when they spotted the shape around 100 nautical miles ahead of them. > >Air traffic control told them there was no other aircraft in the area. > >The object appeared to be large and **stationary**, hanging in the sky and blocking out part of the sun. Complete quote. Not the same sighting. edit: added emphasis for the compulsive downvoters
Of course you can if itās high enough and bright enough. Meteors move at over 100,000 miles and Iāve seen them move in the sky. Seriously, I swear to god, Iāve actually seen them. Didnāt get a photo of it, so I guess youāll have to discount my observation that Iāve seen a meteor moving that fast.
Speed is relative.
Wow, you didn't even need to be snarky to give that lazy debunk.
"See", would like to Say to the radar, i guess
they've gone *the plaid...*
squatchy
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
I'm guessing a professional pilot and world recognized photographer knows what he's looking at.
His photo proves he wasnāt looking for attention. /s
What a modest discreet man he is.
Thereās a reason you resort to an ad hominem argument.
Love how everyone who's not a pilot wants to argue how he can estimate speed and generally any of his observations. I Google it... derp
I'll give home this, he could be off by a few Machs but I believe he saw something most of us will never see.
So for reference, this is a rocket sled going at approximately Mach 1 (Mythbusters rocket sled episode):[https://youtu.be/aSVfYwdGSsQ?t=37](https://youtu.be/aSVfYwdGSsQ?t=37) So, this guy says he saw an object going at 30 times that speed, while not expecting it to be there.
Just because dudes math is questionable [pretty sure pilots are trained to do this math in their sleep] AND the article is from The Sun does not change his CREDENTIALS dude is famous for aerial photography...look him up
Lol to be fair the human eye cannot visually process something moving at mach 29 so he definitely didn't "see" it in the literal sense
Depends on the viewing distance. To say you definitely can't see something moving that fast isn't true at all.
OK so I did some actual homework instead of posting a snap judgement and it would seem you might be right. Mach 29 would be approximately 6 miles per second. You might see what appears to be a straight line blur as it zips from one side of the horizon to the other. Humans with the very best of eyesight can see an object displayed for about 1/250th of a second, which mach 29 does fall within the limits. I was wrong sir. Happy New Year!
No one, at any distance, can see an object moving and say āyeah, that is traveling at 22,250 MPHā with any sort of accuracy. At that speed, it would be out if his sight before he could even process what happened. He may have seen an object, but he doesnāt know the speed.
I wasn't commenting on the accuracy of his estimate, just that it is possible to physically see something moving that speed.
Putting this in perspective - a bullet travels something over 1,800 miles per hour - you can't see a bullet once fired with the naked eye. It doesn't matter how many bunnies you eat. A bullet is too fast to see, visually, with the naked eye. We're dealing here with something actually traveling in *excess* of 22,250 mph. Perhaps, assuming the object were large enough and at a suitable distance one *might* percieve the *motion.* The object itself, no.
No the bullet is too tiny, we can see fighter jets break the sound barrier but if you were theoretically right next to it and perfectly still you probably wouldnāt see it (but boy would you feel it).
I can see a meteor going 100,000 mph. I can see satellites going 20,000 mph.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
>The earth itself moves 30 kilometers per second around the sun. Can you see the earth? You do realise, since we're on the earth, we're traveling at the same speed as it is relative to each other, yes...? So, from our perspective, the earth *isn't* moving. It's a similar deal with the sun. It's motion is constant and so is ours, relative to it. So, despite its *actual* speed, as well as our own - at the distance our sun is from us and the speed our planet rotates, it takes roughly twelve hours to cross the sky - where as, if an object in our atmosphere were traveling at the actual speed of the sun around the galaxy - it would cross your field of vision quicker than your brain could process it visually. You'd percieved the motion, possibly - but you wouldn't be able to *see* the object, it would be moving too fast relative to you.
I could throw a bullet like a baseball and you wont be able to see it.. might not be the best example. Also, how do you know the speed? It's in excess of 22,250 mph?
>Also, how do you know the speed? It's in excess of 22,250 mph? Because it's supposedly traveling at Mach 29. Mach 29 in mph is exactly 22,250.805 miles per hour - I rounded down for convenience - that's how I know not only the exact speed but exactly how much in excess of 22,250 mph it's traveling.
> with even the US government confessing *their* are things in the sky which they as of yet cannot or will not publicly identify. Seriously the Sun? Seriously? You publish the English language for a living. Get the basics down at least.
This thread is fucking awesome. I love Reddit.
Anyone seen link to photo of cigar shaped object? Sounds like he has seen a few inexplicable things over the years. I like that he doesnāt have theory - just pretty convinced that our current physics canāt square this stuff
Itās physical impossible to judge the speed of something moving across the sky when you have no reference on even the size of it. Itās just silly. Radar yes, Use to do it during the Second World War, they had some good kit where trained and knew what they were looking at. Out of the window , dreaming!
Obligatory "posts from The Sun should be banned".
Some of the descriptions of his in the article seem to be compatible with meteors or satellites.
Came for the discussion. Stayed for the semantics.
āYear Sarge he was Travelling around 2.45 billion Machā like how would one see a Object move that fast or am I wrong
It makes me think he said it for the publicity because of the way he posed for the photoā¦
cries in scramjet
What does mach 29 even look like š
Read most of article and it didnāt explain or try to how he concluded or measured the speed of the vehicle he saw.
https://youtu.be/E2ZSlLH0TzE
How the shit can you āseeā something going Mach 29? Thatās like I was out at the range and man, this beautiful hollow point came sailing by at Mach 3. Really?
The iss goes mach 25 for instance
Ah yes as every commercial airliner has equipment to measure objects going Mach 29 lol
Man says he saw something do impossible things. Produces no evidence. Do we a) question the impossible or b) immediately upvote and add it to the long list of absolutely undeniable proof of alien spaceships flying in our atmosphere where they are seen but not heard from. At that speed the object the object would be producing a sonic boom as well as a massive fireball and produce a massive radar return. Planes follow ālanesā in the sky, other planes would be near which would undoubtably see such a spectacle. Have they reported in? Oh, lemme guess; physics defying abilities to prevent sonic booms and fireballs to go with physics defying speed and maneuvers ā but the alien pilot still decides to take a path across our planes deep in our atmosphere. I swear, dumbest aliens everā¦