Within Florida UFOs
What Does the Gimbal Video Really Show?
The Navy's Gimbal video remains unidentified in public, but missing range and sensor data prevent firm claims about extraordinary performance.
On this page
- What Navy crews reported
- Why the infrared image appears to rotate
- What the missing data prevent US knowing
Page outline Jump by section
Introduction
The Gimbal video shows a genuine US Navy recording of an object that the government has not publicly identified. It does not, by itself, show an aircraft performing clearly impossible manoeuvres. Recorded during naval operations off Florida in January 2015, the 34-second infrared clip appears to show a dark, roughly oval shape moving above clouds and then rotating. Navy personnel can be heard discussing other radar tracks and reacting to the apparent turn.
The encounter matters in Florida’s UFO history because it combines trained military observers, advanced sensors and restricted offshore airspace. Yet the most important measurements—especially reliable range, complete radar tracks and the full sensor record—have not been released. That leaves two broad interpretations in contention: the image may document a genuinely unusual object whose behaviour is only partly visible, or it may show a conventional aircraft whose exhaust glare appears to rotate because of the targeting pod’s optics. The public evidence cannot decisively choose between them.
What Navy crews reported
Gimbal was recorded by the Advanced Targeting Forward-Looking Infrared system, or ATFLIR, on an F/A-18F Super Hornet associated with the USS Theodore Roosevelt carrier strike group. The publicly released file lasts about 34 seconds. The Department of Defense formally published it alongside two other Navy videos in April 2020, confirming that the circulating footage was authentic and remained characterised as unidentified. That statement authenticated the recording, not any extraordinary interpretation of it.[defense.gov]defense.govstatement by the department of defense on the release of historical navy videosDepartment of WarStatement by the Department of Defense on the Release…27 Apr 2020 — DOD is releasing the videos in order to clear up…
The event belonged to a wider period of unusual reports by Navy aviators during training and deployment preparations along the eastern seaboard in 2014 and 2015. Pilots described recurring unidentified radar contacts after their aircraft received improved sensors. Some contacts were subsequently tracked with infrared equipment, although visual sightings were much rarer. The reports raised practical concerns about unannounced objects entering heavily used military training areas, regardless of whether their origin was mundane, foreign or genuinely unexplained.[cbsnews.com]cbsnews.comCBS News U.SNavy pilots reportedly spotted UFOs over East CoastMay 27, 2019 — 27 May 2019 — Some US Navy pilots reported seeing unidentified flying o…
In the Gimbal audio, one aviator says there is “a whole fleet of them” and directs attention to the aircraft’s situational-awareness display. Another remarks that the wind is strong and that the objects appear to be travelling against it. The public video itself displays only one infrared image, however. The alleged accompanying formation is therefore supported by crew recollection and cockpit audio, not by objects visibly resolved in the released clip.[The Debrief]thedebrief.orgdevices of unknown origin part ii interlopers over the atlantic ryan gravesThe DebriefDevices of Unknown Origin Part II: Interlopers Over…24 Jun 2021 — When it comes to the “Gimbal” video, Graves explained the…
Former Navy pilot Ryan Graves, who belonged to the squadron involved but did not personally film the published video, has provided much of the later public account. He said he was airborne during the event and saw related tracks through his aircraft’s avionics. According to Graves, five or six returns were arranged in an imperfect wedge, while the object recorded by the targeting pod appeared to slow, wait and then follow them. He also recalled a speed of roughly 120 knots rather than any spectacular hypersonic dash. These details add important context, but they are retrospective testimony; the underlying radar files required to verify them have not been made public.[The Debrief]thedebrief.orgdevices of unknown origin part ii interlopers over the atlantic ryan gravesThe DebriefDevices of Unknown Origin Part II: Interlopers Over…24 Jun 2021 — When it comes to the “Gimbal” video, Graves explained the…
That distinction is central. Gimbal is stronger than an anonymous light-in-the-sky report because it came from military operations and involved more than one information channel. It is weaker than a complete scientific case because the public has only a short infrared segment, cockpit display symbology, audio and later recollections. The sensors may have recorded much more, but analysts outside government cannot inspect most of it.
Why the infrared image appears to rotate
The apparent rotation is the video’s most striking feature. Near the end of the clip, the dark shape seems to tilt clockwise while the distant cloud background remains approximately level. To many viewers, this looks like a solid disc-shaped craft banking in an unusual way. The aviators also react to the motion, apparently regarding it as significant.
A leading sceptical explanation is that the dark shape is not a clear outline of an object at all. It may be infrared glare—a spread-out image formed when a powerful heat source, such as a jet engine exhaust, overwhelms or diffuses across the sensor. In the video’s black-hot display mode, intense heat can appear dark. The apparent oval could therefore be much larger than the aircraft producing it and could conceal ordinary features such as wings or a tail.[researchgate.net]researchgate.netResearch Gate Reconstruction of Potential Flight Paths for the JanuaryResearch Gate Reconstruction of Potential Flight Paths for the January
Under this hypothesis, the source was a conventional aircraft viewed from behind or at an oblique rear angle, perhaps tens of nautical miles away. As the ATFLIR pod’s internal optical assembly adjusted while tracking across its field of view, the glare pattern rotated with part of the optical system. Image-processing or derotation mechanisms kept the horizon comparatively stable, making the heat bloom appear to rotate independently against the clouds. The name “Gimbal” itself refers to the rotating mount that allows a sensor to point in different directions, although the precise internal operation of the military system is not fully available publicly.[metabunk.org]metabunk.orggimbal lock and derotation in flir atflir systems.10792gimbal lock and derotation in flir atflir systems.10792
Supporters of the glare explanation point to smaller streaks and irregularities surrounding the main dark image that appear to turn at the same moment. They interpret these as optical flare features rather than parts of a solid vehicle. They also argue that a distant jet travelling on a broadly steady course fits the modest angular motion seen in the frame and requires no unknown propulsion.
The explanation is plausible, but it is not an official identification. Public reconstructions depend on assumptions about the target’s distance, direction and speed, along with partially inferred details of the ATFLIR optical path. Critics have argued that the rotation is too closely associated with the object’s reported change in movement to be dismissed as coincidence, and that experienced operators would ordinarily recognise the infrared signature of another aircraft. Graves has likewise said that he had viewed large numbers of aircraft through comparable equipment and did not recognise Gimbal as a normal jet.[The Debrief]thedebrief.orgdevices of unknown origin part ii interlopers over the atlantic ryan gravesThe DebriefDevices of Unknown Origin Part II: Interlopers Over…24 Jun 2021 — When it comes to the “Gimbal” video, Graves explained the…
Operator experience carries weight, but it does not settle an imaging problem. Infrared displays do not show an object as the naked eye would see it, and an unfamiliar viewing angle, long distance or saturated heat source can produce misleading shapes. Conversely, demonstrating that optical rotation can occur does not prove that it explains this particular recording. A decisive test would require calibrated sensor information and a known comparison target recorded under closely matching conditions.
Did the object perform an extraordinary manoeuvre?
The public clip contains no measured burst of acceleration, instant high-speed turn or disappearance. It shows a tracked infrared source moving slowly across the field of view and apparently rotating. Claims of much more dramatic performance come mainly from reported radar behaviour outside the video.
A 2023 paper presented to the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics attempted to reconstruct possible flight paths from the on-screen angles and aircraft motion. Its authors found that the result changed radically depending on the assumed range. If the object was within about ten nautical miles, as they attributed to aviator accounts, their reconstruction produced marked deceleration and an abrupt reversal consistent with witnesses’ descriptions. If it was much farther away—around 30 nautical miles—the motion could be compatible with a conventional aircraft seen near its rear aspect.[AIAA Journal]arc.aiaa.org6.2023 41016.2023 4101
This is useful because it exposes the key uncertainty rather than eliminating it. Angular movement alone does not reveal an object’s actual path. A nearby object crossing a given angle may be moving slowly, while a distant object crossing the same angle may be travelling much faster. Calculating speed and acceleration therefore requires a dependable distance measurement. The Gimbal display does not provide a public range figure that analysts can confidently use.
The same problem affects the reported stop and reversal. Graves said the radar picture showed the object pause while other returns turned and passed it, after which it followed them. That would be difficult to reconcile with an ordinary aeroplane if the tracks, ranges and associations were all accurate. But without the complete radar history, it is impossible to establish whether the infrared target and every reported radar return represented the same physical object, whether track-processing errors were involved, or whether the later recollection precisely preserves the sequence.[The Debrief]thedebrief.orgdevices of unknown origin part ii interlopers over the atlantic ryan gravesThe DebriefDevices of Unknown Origin Part II: Interlopers Over…24 Jun 2021 — When it comes to the “Gimbal” video, Graves explained the…
Descriptions of a “fleet” face a similar limitation. Multiple radar returns could indicate several real objects, but they could also involve aircraft elsewhere in the exercise, balloons, radar reflectors, clutter, electronic effects or separate targets that became linked in interpretation. The audio confirms that the aviators believed they were seeing multiple tracks. It does not provide enough technical information to identify those tracks or prove coordinated extraordinary behaviour.
What the missing data prevent us knowing
The Gimbal debate persists because nearly every proposed explanation depends on information absent from the public record. The short video is rich enough to generate hypotheses but too incomplete to test the most important ones conclusively.
The missing or unavailable material includes:
- A reliable target range. Without distance, analysts cannot determine the object’s true size, speed or flight path.
- The complete radar record. This would be needed to verify the reported formation, stopping motion and reversal.
- The recording aircraft’s full navigation data. Heading, position, manoeuvres and wind conditions would narrow possible geometries.
- The complete sensor sequence. Frames before and after the released segment might show acquisition, loss of track or changes in image appearance.
- Detailed ATFLIR calibration information. This would help establish whether glare, internal rotation and image derotation reproduce the observed motion.
- Independent identification data. Air-traffic, military exercise and intelligence records might reveal conventional aircraft or other objects in the relevant area.
Some of this information may remain classified because it would expose sensor performance, military tactics or operational locations. That is understandable from a defence perspective, but it creates a permanent evidential problem: the public is asked to assess an incident using only the least sensitive fragment of a much larger sensor picture.
Official wording should also be read carefully. The Pentagon’s 2020 release said the phenomena in the three Navy videos remained “unidentified”. The All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office, or AARO, continues to list Gimbal as an unresolved Navy case in its official imagery collection. “Unresolved” means that the available evidence has not supported a conclusive attribution. It does not mean that investigators have verified unusual technology, impossible physics or a non-human origin.[U.S. Department of War]defense.govstatement by the department of defense on the release of historical navy videosDepartment of WarStatement by the Department of Defense on the Release…27 Apr 2020 — DOD is releasing the videos in order to clear up…
Later official work on other well-known videos illustrates why caution is warranted. AARO has shown that apparent high speed, entry into water or unusual shape can sometimes result from parallax, infrared contrast, viewing geometry or insufficient resolution. Those findings do not automatically explain Gimbal, but they demonstrate that impressive cockpit imagery may become less extraordinary once range and geometry are reconstructed.[AARO]aaro.milOpen source on aaro.mil.
Which explanation best fits the evidence?
The conventional-aircraft theory currently offers the clearest account of what is visible in the video alone. A distant jet can produce a strong infrared heat signature; glare can obscure its normal outline; and optical rotation within a gimballed targeting system can make the image appear to turn. The clip contains no unambiguous display of extraordinary speed or acceleration.
That assessment becomes less secure when the wider crew account is included. Multiple radar detections, an alleged formation, very low reported speed, the absence of identification signals and the claimed stop-and-reversal sequence are not fully explained by identifying the visible blob as aircraft glare. The difficulty is that the strongest parts of that case remain testimony about data the public cannot examine.
Other suggestions—balloons, drones, electronic-warfare effects or classified US technology—remain possible at a general level but are weakly specified for this particular event. Balloons could account for slow motion but not easily for the reported coordinated radar behaviour. A drone might produce an infrared target but would need range and endurance consistent with offshore operations. Electronic spoofing could affect radar, yet it would not straightforwardly account for a separately detected infrared source. A classified exercise is conceivable in military airspace, though no public evidence directly identifies one.
The most defensible conclusion is therefore narrower than either side often claims. Gimbal remains unidentified in the public record, but the video does not establish extraordinary performance. The apparent rotation has a credible optical explanation, while the more challenging aspects of the encounter depend on unreleased radar and range information. Within Florida’s UFO history, it is best understood as a genuinely unresolved military observation with substantial conventional possibilities, not as a debunked hoax and not as confirmed evidence of an exotic craft.
Amazon book picks
Further Reading
Books and field guides related to What Does the Gimbal Video Really Show?. Use these as the next step if you want deeper reading beyond the article.
UFOs: Generals, Pilots, and Government Officials Go on the Re...
Focuses on credible military and aviation reports.
eBay marketplace picks
Marketplace Samples
Live-tested eBay searches with available results related to this page.
Selected fromUFO memorabilia oneBay.co.uk.
Endnotes
1.
Source: defense.gov
Title: statement by the department of defense on the release of historical navy videos
Link:https://www.defense.gov/News/Releases/release/article/2165713/statement-by-the-department-of-defense-on-the-release-of-historical-navy-videos/
Source snippet
Department of WarStatement by the Department of Defense on the Release...27 Apr 2020 — DOD is releasing the videos in order to clear up...
2.
Source: navair.navy.mil
Title: Naval Air Systems Command Documents | NAVAIR
Link:https://www.navair.navy.mil/foia/documents
Source snippet
Naval Air Systems CommandDocuments | NAVAIR - FOIA - Navymobile Naval Air Systems Command. Download GIMBAL Video - GIMBAL.mp4 - Please do...
3.
Source: twz.com
Link:https://www.twz.com/33371/here-are-the-detailed-ufo-incident-reports-from-navy-pilots-flying-off-the-east-coast
Source snippet
Here Are The Navy Pilot Reports From Encounters With...13 May 2020 — The reports are the first official documentation of various rece...
Published: May 2020
4.
Source: researchgate.net
Title: Research Gate Reconstruction of Potential Flight Paths for the January
Link:https://www.researchgate.net/publication/371606041_Reconstruction_of_Potential_Flight_Paths_for_the_January_2015_Gimbal_UAP
5.
Source: metabunk.org
Title: a gimbal glare explainer.12230
Link:https://www.metabunk.org/threads/a-gimbal-glare-explainer.12230/
6.
Source: metabunk.org
Title: gimbal lock and derotation in flir atflir systems.10792
Link:https://www.metabunk.org/threads/gimbal-lock-and-derotation-in-flir-atflir-systems.10792/
7.
Source: petapixel.com
Title: famous navy ufo video was actually camera glare evidence suggests
Link:https://petapixel.com/2022/03/14/famous-navy-ufo-video-was-actually-camera-glare-evidence-suggests/
8.
Source: arc.aiaa.org
Title: 6.2023 4101
Link:https://arc.aiaa.org/doi/10.2514/6.2023-4101
9.
Source: aaro.mil
Link:https://www.aaro.mil/UAP-Cases/Official-UAP-Imagery/
10.
Source: aaro.mil
Title: Puerto Rico UAP Case Resolution
Link:https://www.aaro.mil/Portals/136/PDFs/case_resolution_reports/AARO_Puerto_Rico_UAP_Case_Resolution.pdf
11.
Source: comptroller.defense.gov
Title: RDTE Vol3 OSD RDTE PB21 Justification Book
Link:https://comptroller.defense.gov/Portals/45/Documents/defbudget/fy2021/budget_justification/pdfs/03_RDT_and_E/RDTE_Vol3_OSD_RDTE_PB21_Justification_Book.pdf
12.
Source: defense.gov
Link:https://www.defense.gov/News/Contracts/contract/article/2364180/
13.
Source: media.defense.gov
Title: DOD STTR 23.D FULL
Link:https://media.defense.gov/2024/Feb/01/2003386095/-1/-1/0/DOD_STTR_23.D_FULL.PDF
14.
Source: aaro.mil
Link:https://www.aaro.mil/
15.
Source: history.com
Title: US S Roosevelt ‘Go Fast’ UFO: Declassified Video
Link:https://www.history.com/videos/uss-roosevelt-gofast-ufo-declassified-video
16.
Source: war.gov
Title: statement by the department of defense on the release of historical navy videos
Link:https://www.war.gov/News/Releases/Release/Article/2165713/statement-by-the-department-of-defense-on-the-release-of-historical-navy-videos/
17.
Source: dvidshub.net
Link:https://www.dvidshub.net/video/956955/gimbal-uap
Source snippet
GIMBAL - UAP2015. Courtesy Video. Naval Air Systems Command · ✓ ✗ Subscribe. 16. GIMBAL - UAP Video. VIDEO INFO. Date Taken: 01.01...
18.
Source: cbsnews.com
Title: CBS News U.S
Link:https://www.cbsnews.com/news/navy-pilots-ufo-reports-confirmed-new-york-times-military-unidentified-flying-object/
Source snippet
Navy pilots reportedly spotted UFOs over East CoastMay 27, 2019 — 27 May 2019 — Some US Navy pilots reported seeing unidentified flying o...
Published: May 27, 2019
19.
Source: thedebrief.org
Title: devices of unknown origin part ii interlopers over the atlantic ryan graves
Link:https://thedebrief.org/devices-of-unknown-origin-part-ii-interlopers-over-the-atlantic-ryan-graves/
Source snippet
The DebriefDevices of Unknown Origin Part II: Interlopers Over...24 Jun 2021 — When it comes to the “Gimbal” video, Graves explained the...
20.
Source: leonarddavid.com
Title: debunking navy ufo videos
Link:https://www.leonarddavid.com/debunking-navy-ufo-videos/
21.
Source: thedebrief.org
Link:https://thedebrief.org/category/features/feed/
22.
Source: thedebrief.org
Link:https://thedebrief.org/search/disinformation/feed/rss2/
Additional References
23.
Source: keithmayerson.com
Link:https://keithmayerson.com/works/uss-roosevelt-gimbal-ufo-still-from-the-declassified-jan-2015-video/
Source snippet
Keith MayersonUSS Roosevelt 'Gimbal UFO': Still from the Declassified...On the video, you can hear the voice of the Navy pilot talk with...
24.
Source: ilkogretim-online.org
Link:https://ilkogretim-online.org/index.php/pub/article/download/1991/1935/3822
25.
Source: facebook.com
Link:https://www.facebook.com/NewsNationNow/posts/a-former-navy-pilot-says-uap-sightings-were-routine-and-regularly-discussed-and-/302505632156461/
26.
Source: reddit.com
Link:https://www.reddit.com/r/AskPhysics/comments/1dgc8od/are_there_good_scientific_explanations_for_ufo/
27.
Source: bialikbreakdown.com
Link:https://www.bialikbreakdown.com/watch-podcast/ufo-whistleblower-navy-pilot-forces-congress-to-admit-ufos-are-real-ryan-graves
28.
Source: reddit.com
Link:https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/1bfmuzz/for_those_who_dont_know_the_gimbal_and_gofast/
29.
Source: tarmacview.com
Link:https://www.tarmacview.com/glossary/gimbal/
30.
Source: interestingengineering.com
Link:https://interestingengineering.com/videos/pentagon-gimbal-ufo
31.
Source: renishaw.com
Link:https://www.renishaw.com/en/how-do-position-encoders-improve-gimbal-performance–49986?srsltid=AfmBOoptLnQHsqQQ_2nqnXTcKzeBSRWtXYqwp5W8NJoZAOiUQFNyw0aK
32.
Source: skepticalinquirer.org
Link:https://skepticalinquirer.org/2024/10/psychics-and-demons-at-the-pentagon/