MY EVALUATION OF THE 2022 ANNUAL REPORT ON UNIDENTIFIED AERIAL PHENOMENA
The document elaborated by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, Ms.Avril Haines, comprises a total of 11 pages, of which –putting aside many references to bureaucratic demands and relationships among organizations— only 3 references on page 2, one paragraph on page 3, almost all of page 5 and one paragraph on page 6 deal with UAP.
After waiting since October to know what this Report would say, this reality is disappointing. We expected more assertions, and a clearer panorama on the subject, but the report leaves us with unanswered questions.
Let's go directly to what it says about UAPs, because it is undoubtedly important:.
1) Causes of increasing in the number of reports: (page 2) "the observed increase in the UAP reporting rate is partially due to a better understanding of the possible threats the UAP may represent…..and partially due to reduced stigma surrounding UAP reporting."
In other words, there has been not an increased UAP activity but an increased in reporting, including very old cases.
2) Foreign involvement in UAP events: (page 2) "UAP events continue to occur in restricted or sensitive airspace, highlighting concerns for safety of flight or adversary collection of activity" and then the Report says: "this may result from a collection bias due to the number of active aircraft and sensors combined with focused attention and guidance to report anomalies." There is a declared "collection bias", that is, a tendency to collect reported anomalies. "AARO, in conjunction with NIM-Aviation and IC, will continue to investigate any evidence of possible foreign government involvement in UAP events." Foreign government involvement is something to investigate as possible, which means that so far there is no evidence that such a situation has effectively happened. With the use of sophisticated satellites to capture any military activity, it sounds a little bit preposterous to think that an adversary foreign government will need to risk some kind of crafts, mingling them with American airplanes to detect what they are doing.
3) Operator and equipment error: The Report stat es on page 3 "Multiple factors affect the observation and detection of UAP, such as weather, illumination, atmospheric effects, or the accurate interpretation of sensor data." Moreover, the Report adds: "ODNI and AARO acknowledge that a select number of UAP incidents may be attributable to sensor irregularities or variances, such as operator or equipment error."
4) Total of cases: It is on page 5 where the Report really enters in the matter, and here is what it says: a) "The ODNI preliminary assessment on UAP discussed 144 UAP reports" that went until 05 March 2021; b) "Since then, AARO received a total of 247 news UAP reports; c) "An additional 119 UAP reports on events occurred before 05 March 2021, but were not included in the preliminary assessment, have been discovered or reported after the preliminary assessment's time period; d) "These 366 additional reports" [247+119] when combined with the 144 reports identified in the preliminary assessment, bring the total UAP reports cataloged to date to 510."
5) Characterization of cases: (page 5) "AARO's initial analysis and characterization of the 366 newly-identified reports, informed by a multi-agency process, judged more than half as exhibiting unremarkable characteristics: 26 characterized as Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) or UAS-like entities; 163 characterized as balloon or balloon-like entities, and 6 attributed to clutter, e.g. birds, weather events, or airborne debris like plastic bags.
6) The remaining cases to be characterized: The Report points out that "Initial characterization does not mean positively resolved or unidentified." There remain "171 uncharacterized and unattributed UAP reports. Some of these uncharacterized UAP appear to have demonstrated unusual flight characteristics or performance capabilities, and require further analysis."
7) Lack of quality: "The majority of new UAP reporting originates from U.S. Navy and U.S. Air Force aviators and operators" But, "many reports lack enough detailed data to enable attribution of UAP with high certainty."
8) No collision or health problems: "To date, there have been no reported collisions between U. S. aircraft and UAP. Regarding health concerns, there have also been no encounters with UAP confirmed to contribute directly to adverse health-related effects to the observer(s).
9)Definition of UAP: (page 11) "Airborne objects not immediately identifiable. The acronym UAP represents the broadest category of airborne objects reviewed for analysis."
Conclusion: The Report recognizes that there are certain UAP that require further analysis. And although "limited data on UAP continues to be a challenge, the establishment of AARO…..will allow for increased coordination of efforts against the UAP problem set." In other words, we have to patiently wait that there will be a future instance in which AARO would be able to know more and bring concise and solid information about the UAP.
Milton W. Hourcade
Montevideo, January 14, 2023.
Post a Comment