
Chilean officials can’t identify a strange IR signal seen by its Navy - astrodev
http://arstechnica.com/science/2017/01/after-two-years-of-study-chilean-officials-cant-explain-ufo-sighting/
======
rahimiali
another analysis that suggests this might be airplanes. scroll to the
comments, where they plug in GPS coordinates from the video into google early,
and superimpose the location of various flights from public records.

[https://www.metabunk.org/explanation-for-chilean-navy-ufo-
vi...](https://www.metabunk.org/explanation-for-chilean-navy-ufo-video-
aerodynamic-contrail.t8306/)

~~~
icanhackit
> another analysis that suggests this might be airplanes

Then they'd have to be stealth airplanes and unwilling to communicate with the
patrol. From the source [1] article:

 _Shortly thereafter, the pilot contacted two radar stations - one close by on
the coast, and the other the main DGAC Control system (Ground Primary Radar)
in Santiago - to report the unknown traffic. Neither station could detect it
on radar, although both easily picked up the helicopter. (The object was well
within the range of radar detection.) Air traffic controllers confirmed that
no traffic, either civilian or military, had been reported in the area, and
that no aircraft had been authorized to fly in the controlled air space where
the object was located. The on-board radar was also unable to detect the
object and the camera’s radar could not lock onto it.

The pilot tried several times to communicate with the UAP, using the multi-
national, civilian bandwidth designed for this purpose. He received no reply._

[1] [http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/groundbreaking-ufo-
video...](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/groundbreaking-ufo-video-just-
released-from-chilean_us_586d37bce4b014e7c72ee56b)

~~~
bastawhiz
I would argue that just because nobody answered doesn't mean it wasn't an
airplane. Maybe the guy was just eating a sandwich and didn't feel like
picking up his radio. I'd also have a hard time believing Chile keeps perfect
flight records. Occam's razor and all that.

~~~
icanhackit
Fine, what about the lack of radar signature - unable to be detected either
from nearby ground-based installations, the helicopter's dedicated radar or
the additional radar on the IR sensor cluster? I think that was the more
interesting point. Also remember the helicopter was travelling at reasonably
low speeds of _132 knots, or 152 mph_ yet if we're looking at the turbofan
exhausts/afterburner we should expect object to reduce in size accordingly.

------
erik_landerholm
I posted this yesterday, but the article references the huffington post, so I
figured I'd drop it here too:
[http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_586d37bce4b014e7c72ee56b](http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_586d37bce4b014e7c72ee56b)

------
remarkEon
When the object first comes on screen I initially thought "CH-47 making a left
turn."[1] It looks like there's two little "nubs" on the front and back at the
first zoom. Don't have any explanation for the discharge out the back,
however.

[1]
[http://www.boeing.com/defense/ch-47-chinook/](http://www.boeing.com/defense/ch-47-chinook/)

------
TTPrograms
I'm not an expert on fighter thermal signatures, but this sort of looks like
the rear output of two engines followed by usage of the afterburners maybe?

[http://i51.tinypic.com/20fs0pf.jpg](http://i51.tinypic.com/20fs0pf.jpg)

It may correspond to known aircraft configuration, or an unknown one, but it
doesn't seem like there's anything anomalous about it...

~~~
kowdermeister
This thing just hovers there, slowly moving.

Seeing noting in the visible spectrum is not anomalous?

~~~
flosstop
Here my guess: \- It appears stationary as it is travelling towards the camera
and very far away. \- It isn't apparent in the visible spectrum because of
cloud/haze between it and the camera. \- The plume appears as it passes
through a layer of cloud and heats the moisture therein.

~~~
Applejinx
Absolutely. It's a twin engined something, and we're seeing the heat
signature. May not even be an unusual aircraft.

~~~
heatButNoRadar
How come no radar signature. Is that not unusual for aircraft, or are most
aircraft radar absorbing?

~~~
hindsightbias
Most civilian ATC radars are 'Secondary' radars which depend on cooperative
transponders on all aircraft. If you turn your transponder off, the system
doesn't work.

US ATC uses 'Primary' radars as backup for locating aircraft that don't have
transponders or don't have them on. Militaries use Primary radars for most of
their activities. Other articles don't provide distinction on what type of
radar was used.

------
avian
The article says that the possibility that this was an object reentering the
atmosphere was dismissed. Why? There is no sense of scale here. It could be
something very fast and far away, like a bolide leaving a trail of debris.

------
vonkale
Could it be some kind of IR reflection of the helicopter itself due to the
structure of the clouds? It would seem logical if there was no radar signal,
it was on a linear path with the helicopter and did not show on normal camera.
Any opinions?

~~~
pcrh
What would the plume be? Would the helicopter produce a dumbell-shaped heat
signature?

------
avenoir
Right at the 0:46 mark (and again at 10 minutes) in the video you can see
something that resembles a quad-copter with propellers on 4 sides of the
flying object. Or am i just imagining things?

~~~
tedd4u
Definitely remarked that to myself as well, but the rotors look huge compared
with the craft itself ... and extend above, below, left and right. Like a
drone traveling sideways? Strange indeed.

------
awinter-py
The chilean Very Large Telescope has a laser system that creates a 'virtual
guide star' \-- presumably this isn't that.

~~~
nraynaud
They avoid looking low over the horizon.

------
YeGoblynQueenne
A UFO releasing plumes of material in the atmosphere?

Just wait 'till the contrails community gets a whiff of this.

~~~
0xffff2
I think you actually mean "chemtrails". Contrails are perfectly unremarkable
phenomena.

~~~
YeGoblynQueenne
Dammit. _Chem_ trails. Thank you.

------
mannykannot
Is temperature the only determinant of intensity, or could this also depend on
something like opacity, emissivity or reflectance? Could these be ordinary
contrails?

~~~
Semiapies
I'd heavily recommend the metabunk thread linked by rahimiali. Reflection off
a perfectly ordinary contrail is a likely explanation..

~~~
mannykannot
Yes - I have just finished reading it. QED.

------
snowwrestler
Why did the article say it was a heat signature? I thought heat looked white
to an IR sensor, and cold looked black.

EDIT: thank you to the informative replies below!

~~~
kowdermeister
They usually invert it to have a better contrast against the background.

~~~
FoeNyx
In fact the video shows the 'inverted' mode at some point.
[https://youtu.be/NkUTGpegZN0?t=363](https://youtu.be/NkUTGpegZN0?t=363)

------
kowdermeister
> The significance of this sighting is that it was made by credible Navy
> officers, lasted nearly 10 minutes, and involved observation in both the
> visible and infrared portions of the spectrum.

Thanks, that's what all previous UFO disbelievers were crying about. I don't
suggest any ET origin to be clear. If that footage is not faked (which doesn't
seem to be case) it will going to be a hard puzzle to solve.

------
jimrandomh
So, the Chilean Navy has some strange footage, probably corresponding to some
other country's secret aircraft, and they... get it published on Ars Technica
and invite the literally-schizophrenic "UFO" community to take a look at it?

~~~
lobster_johnson
Where does it say that they went to Ars Technica? They published a press
release [1].

[1] [http://www.cefaa.gob.cl/home/en-la-
prensa/noticias/casoarmad...](http://www.cefaa.gob.cl/home/en-la-
prensa/noticias/casoarmada)

