UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2007 > Nov > Nov 21

Re: Pilots & UAP

From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2007 08:52:55 -0800
Archived: Wed, 21 Nov 2007 07:25:09 -0500
Subject: Re: Pilots & UAP

>From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2007 15:42:45 -0400
>Subject: Re: Pilots & UAP

>>From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2007 19:57:56 -0800
>>Subject: Re: Pilots & UAP

>>>From: Joe McGonagle <joe.mcgonagle.nul>
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2007 16:18:24 +0000
>>>Subject: Pilots & UAP [was: Question To FAA About National
>>>Press Club Conference]

>>>>From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
>>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>>Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2007 11:43:00 -0400
>>>>Subject: Re: Question To FAA About National Press Club

>The fly in the ointment here is that some unknown cannot be
>positively identified for its size since you don't know its
>make and type - obviously - but if it is within range of known
>ground markers, hills, mountains, towers, airports, lakes,
>intersections on major highways or as you have suggested, Dave,
>between your airplane and another known aircraft-make whose
>distance you can estimate because you know what its apparent
>size will be at various distances.

>Other things come into play such as flight characteristics,
>reflectivity, outline, color attitude, movement against the
>background and odd behavior.

>Perception is a very necessary thing for pilots. Even with a
>fixed rate of descent and glideslope, when it comes to setting
>the wheels on the pavement you still need your perceptive
>ability to know just exactly when to flare so the wheels contact
>just at the stall. It gets even more important whan you are in
>the flare on a 747 and your ass is 90 feet off the ground and
>the main wheels are 100 feet behind you.

One more thing about perception is that it is normally far more
reliable and stable than debunkers care to admit or know. Only
occasionally do our senses fool us, and usually in trick
laboratory situations, like specially constructed optical
illusions. That's just a well-known fact in experimental
psychology. We may misidentify things and forget details, but
usually we do not misperceive them at the time, where perception
here I mean the basic physical characteristics such as color,
shape, motion, brightness, time, etc. If we were stumbling
around because we were constantly misjudging things, we wouldn't
be engaged in any discussions here because the human race would
have died out a long time ago from fundamental incompetence.

Kenneth Arnold I've always considered to be a very good pilot
sighting because he gauged distance and size and speed against
known landmarks. Thus he saw the objects fly in front of and be
outlined against the snows of Mt. Rainier and momentarily
disappear behind a subpeak. This gave an accurate range of about
23 miles. The angular size he gave as about the same as the
distance between the two outer engines of a DC-4 he saw in the
distance, which was 10-15 miles away. From that one can estimate
the absolute size of the objects. (Another clue was when he said
the objects were about 20 times longer than thick and
practically disappeared in profile when viewed against the
background of Rainier.) Finally he timed how long it took them
to fly between the landmarks of Mt. Rainier and Mt. Adams.

All in all, Arnold was a very good observer and his report was
rich in valuable details. Like in most things, good observation
skills can also be trained. Thus those taught to pay attention
to certain details because their lives and careers depend on it
tend to be better observers than those who aren't so trained,
therefore pilots, cops, military personnel, etc. A trained
doctor can see things in an X-ray that untrained person can't,
even though both are looking at the same image. It's all a
matter of background knowledge, experience, and knowing what to
pay attention to and what to ignore.

Yes, these are generalities, I know. Being a cop doesn't mean
someone is necessarily a good observer. But generalities often
have a lot of truth in them and shouldn't be ignored. Thus I
bristle when a debunker like McGaha goes on national TV and
claims that pilots are no better than anybody else at being able
to identify things in the sky. Perish the thought the next time
we all fly. We depend on these guys for our very lives.

David Rudiak

Listen to 'Strange Days... Indeed' - The PodCast



[ Next Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |

UFO UpDates Main Index

UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp

Archive programming by Glenn Campbell at Glenn-Campbell.com