Within Louisiana UFOs
Why Do Some Louisiana Pilot Sightings Stay Unresolved?
Modern pilot reports show how Louisiana sightings can remain unresolved when aviation authorities lack radar confirmation, images or corroborating witnesses.
On this page
- The 2017 Shreveport hovering object report
- How aviation occurrence systems record unknown aircraft
- Why limited data can preserve uncertainty without proving anything extraordinary
Page outline Jump by section
Introduction
Some Louisiana aviation sightings stay unresolved for a simple reason: the report records a genuine moment of uncertainty, but not enough information to reconstruct it. The best example is the hovering, multi-coloured object reported near Shreveport Regional Airport in early January 2018—often loosely grouped with the state’s 2017-era pilot and drone reports. Air-traffic personnel described something apparently as large as a helicopter, but another aircraft could not confirm it. No publicly available photograph, radar track or identified operator settled the matter.[TWZ]twz.comThe Strangest Encounters With Unidentified Aircraft We've Found In The FAA's Huge Database (Updated)…
That makes the case interesting, but not strong evidence of extraordinary technology. It sits inside a wider family of Louisiana aviation reports in which controllers and pilots briefly encounter an unknown object and the Federal Aviation Administration records it chiefly as a possible drone or flight-safety hazard. Such records preserve uncertainty; they do not certify that a mysterious craft was present.
What happened over Shreveport?
The Shreveport incident was logged under FAA Mandatory Occurrence Report number SHV-M-2018/01/03-0002. Although it is sometimes described as a 2017 case, the available record gives the time as 04:45 UTC on 4 January 2018, corresponding to the evening of 3 January in Louisiana. The observation came from Shreveport’s airport control tower rather than from the pilot of an aircraft.[TWZ]twz.comThe Strangest Encounters With Unidentified Aircraft We've Found In The FAA's Huge Database (Updated)…
According to the report, an unknown object was first seen roughly one or two miles south-west of Shreveport Regional Airport. It displayed green, red and amber or yellow lights and appeared to hover at an estimated altitude of between 1,500 and 2,000 feet. It then seemed to move south, increase its altitude to about 4,000 feet and reach a position approximately five miles from the airport. One preliminary description compared its apparent size with that of a helicopter. Shreveport police were notified.[TWZ]twz.comThe Strangest Encounters With Unidentified Aircraft We've Found In The FAA's Huge Database (Updated)…
Controllers attempted the most obvious immediate check: they asked an aircraft in the area to look for the object. The crew could not verify the sighting. The occurrence record therefore ended with the aircraft type listed as unknown. It does not document a close approach, evasive manoeuvre, unusual acceleration or interference with an aircraft. Nor does the publicly available material provide a radar return that can confidently be linked to the reported lights.[TWZ]twz.comThe Strangest Encounters With Unidentified Aircraft We've Found In The FAA's Huge Database (Updated)…
Those limitations change how the case should be read. The report supports the modest conclusion that airport personnel saw lights they could not identify at the time. It does not establish the object’s true distance, size or altitude. All three estimates depended on visual judgement, and visual estimates become especially uncertain at night when observers have no known object against which to compare an isolated light.
Why “as large as a helicopter” is not a measurement
The helicopter comparison sounds impressive, but apparent size cannot be converted into physical size without a reliable distance. A small object nearby and a much larger object farther away can occupy the same angle in an observer’s vision. At night, coloured lights may suggest the outline of an aircraft even when its body is invisible.
The reported climb from about 2,000 to 4,000 feet presents the same difficulty. Unless the object was tracked by radar or its range was otherwise known, an apparent rise could represent a real climb, a change in distance, ordinary horizontal movement or an incorrect estimate. The report does not contain enough geometry to choose between those possibilities.
This is not a reason to dismiss the controllers. Air-traffic professionals are trained observers of aircraft movement, and their decision to document the event and seek confirmation was appropriate. It is instead a reminder that professional experience cannot create missing range, altitude or sensor data after the fact.
How aviation systems record an unknown object
The Shreveport report belongs to an aviation-safety system, not a dedicated UFO investigation. That distinction explains both its value and its limitations.
FAA procedures require reports when a pilot describes, or air-traffic control becomes aware of, unauthorised drone activity or authorised drone activity conducted unsafely. Such events can be entered as Mandatory Occurrence Reports through the agency’s Comprehensive Electronic Data Analysis and Reporting system. The purpose is to document a possible hazard, alert relevant facilities and support operational or law-enforcement action—not necessarily to determine the object’s ultimate identity.[FAA]faa.govFAA Order JO 7210.632A Air Traffic Organization…September 28, 2020 — 1 Oct 2020 — Any instance where a pilot reports or air traffic…
This system has an important practical bias. In modern airspace, an unfamiliar object near an airport is often treated provisionally as an unmanned aircraft system, or UAS. That is sensible from a safety perspective because drones are common, can enter controlled airspace unlawfully and may pose collision risks. The FAA says it continues to receive more than 100 reports of drones near airports each month.[FAA]faa.govDrone Sightings Near AirportsReports of unmanned aircraft (UAS) sightings from pilots, citizens and law enforcement remain high. The F…
But a UAS label in an occurrence report does not necessarily mean that investigators identified a drone. The Shreveport form used the category “possible UFO/UAS” and concluded that the type was unknown. Some reporting fields require personnel to place a poorly described object within an established aviation category even where the basic classification remains uncertain.[TWZ]twz.comThe Strangest Encounters With Unidentified Aircraft We've Found In The FAA's Huge Database (Updated)…
The result is easily misunderstood:
- The event was officially recorded. This confirms that aviation personnel reported an operational concern.
- The object was not officially identified. The record did not establish a specific drone, helicopter, balloon or other source.
- “Unknown” describes the investigation’s limit. It does not identify a new class of aircraft.
- Police notification shows caution, not confirmation. Law enforcement may be contacted because unauthorised drone activity near an airport can be dangerous or illegal.
FAA reports are therefore useful primary records of what controllers or pilots said at the time. They are less useful as finished case investigations when no follow-up evidence, interview transcript, radar analysis or identified operator becomes available.
The New Orleans disc report
Shreveport was not the only Louisiana airport case from this period. On 16 September 2017, a pilot approaching New Orleans reported a silver, disc-shaped object near the aircraft at about 1,500 feet. The FAA occurrence material described it as a possible drone roughly two miles from the aircraft’s position, reportedly climbing and descending. Kenner police were notified, and no evasive action was reported.[TWZ]twz.comThe Strangest Encounters With Unidentified Aircraft We've Found In The FAA's Huge Database (Updated)…
The surviving summaries contain an inconsistency over the reporting aircraft. One preliminary entry refers to a British Aerospace Jetstream 31, while the associated Mandatory Occurrence Report summary identifies a Pilatus PC-12 landing on runway 29. That discrepancy may reflect an administrative transcription issue, two stages of reporting or an error in one of the summaries. Without the complete underlying communications and flight information, it should not be silently resolved in favour of either version.[TWZ]twz.comThe Strangest Encounters With Unidentified Aircraft We've Found In The FAA's Huge Database (Updated)…
What remains consistent is the central claim: a pilot reported a silver object near the New Orleans arrival path, considered it drone-like or disc-shaped, and did not need to take avoiding action. As with Shreveport, the public record supplies no image, recovered object or confirmed operator.
This case is somewhat stronger than an isolated civilian account because it was made in an operational aviation setting and promptly entered into a formal safety process. Yet it remains weak as evidence for extraordinary performance. There is no reported impossible speed, abrupt acceleration or verified movement beyond known aircraft capabilities. Even the description of climbing and descending depends on a short visual observation whose distance was uncertain.
Why pilot testimony matters—but cannot stand alone
Pilots are often treated as ideal UFO witnesses. They understand aircraft lighting, normal traffic behaviour and the appearance of objects in flight. A report made immediately to air-traffic control can also preserve the original language before memory and publicity reshape the story.
Those are genuine advantages. They make aviation reports generally more useful than anonymous accounts submitted years later. They do not, however, eliminate familiar observational problems.
A cockpit is a demanding environment. The aircraft is moving, the observer may see the object for only seconds, and the view can be affected by windscreen reflections, haze, cloud layers, lighting and rapid changes in perspective. The pilot may also lack any reliable way of judging the unknown object’s distance. Without distance, estimates of size and speed can be badly distorted.
Night observations introduce further ambiguity. Red, green and white or amber lights are common on conventional aircraft, helicopters and drones. Atmospheric conditions can alter their apparent brightness or colour, while an aircraft approaching almost directly towards an observer may seem to hover because its angular position changes very little.
Bright planets and stars can also appear stationary or strangely mobile when viewed from a turning aircraft, although the Shreveport report’s apparent movement and multiple colours prevent any single astronomical explanation from being accepted without a reconstruction. Balloons, illuminated advertising devices, distant helicopters and unconventional drone configurations are other possibilities. None has been demonstrated in the available material.
The strongest conclusion is therefore not that a particular ordinary explanation has solved the Shreveport case. It is that several ordinary categories remain viable because the report lacks the measurements needed to test them.
Why radar did not settle the case
A common assumption is that anything near a controlled airport must appear clearly on radar. In practice, radar is not an all-seeing camera.
Air-traffic surveillance systems are designed primarily to manage cooperative aircraft and significant traffic targets. An aircraft carrying a working transponder can transmit identity and altitude data. A small drone, balloon or other non-cooperative object may provide a weak, intermittent or filtered return. Ground clutter, weather, birds and other unwanted signals must also be suppressed so that controllers are not overwhelmed.
Even when radar records an unidentified return, linking it to a visual sighting requires close agreement in time, bearing, range and altitude. A vague statement that something appeared south of an airport is not enough to establish that a particular radar point represents the same object.
The publicly reported Shreveport material does not say that a corresponding radar track was found. That absence has two possible meanings which should not be confused. It may mean that no useful radar return existed, or simply that no radar analysis was released with the occurrence summary. Either way, the public evidence cannot be used to calculate the object’s movement or demonstrate unusual flight performance.
NASA’s independent UAP study later identified this exact class of problem. It found that investigations are commonly hindered by poor sensor calibration, missing metadata, incomplete archiving and the lack of simultaneous measurements from more than one instrument. It recommended that future cases be captured by multiple, well-calibrated sensors rather than depending on a single visual report.[NASA Science]science.nasa.govNASA Science…
Reporting systems preserve incidents, not complete investigations
Two separate reporting channels help explain the modern aviation record.
The FAA’s occurrence-reporting process captures events that may affect airspace operations. It can trigger notifications to other facilities, security networks or police. Its emphasis is immediate hazard management.
NASA’s Aviation Safety Reporting System, usually called ASRS, collects voluntary and confidential accounts from pilots, controllers, flight attendants, mechanics and other aviation personnel. Identifying details are removed before reports enter its public database, and the programme is designed to encourage candid reporting without unnecessary fear of punishment.[asrs.arc.nasa.gov]asrs.arc.nasa.govAll submissions are voluntaryAviation Safety Reporting System - ConfidentialityConfidentiality and Incentives to Report Pilots, air traffic controllers, flight…
ASRS is valuable for discovering recurring safety patterns, but confidentiality creates a trade-off for UFO research. De-identification can remove precise dates, organisations and other details that would help an independent investigator match a report with radar, weather, satellite passages or known flights. A system optimised for learning broad safety lessons is not automatically optimised for solving one unusual sighting.
NASA’s 2023 UAP study recommended making better use of ASRS for commercial-pilot reports and exploring how advanced analysis could be incorporated into future air-traffic-management systems. It also observed that the United States lacked a standardised civilian UAP reporting system, leaving many accounts sparse, incomplete and inconsistently vetted.[NASA Science]science.nasa.govNASA Science…
This explains why modern Louisiana cases can be both better documented and still unresolved. They may have a timestamp, airport code, aircraft context and official occurrence number—far more structure than many historical newspaper sightings—but still lack the sensor package required for a scientific conclusion.
What would have strengthened the Shreveport report?
The Shreveport observation could have become a substantially stronger case if several independent forms of evidence had been preserved.
A confirmed radar track could have established range, altitude and movement. Even an intermittent return might have helped distinguish a nearby small object from a distant conventional aircraft.
Recorded tower communications could have shown exactly when the object was first seen, how several observers described it and what the checking aircraft was asked to examine.
Multiple independent witnesses positioned at known locations could have allowed triangulation. The aircraft that failed to confirm the object does not disprove the tower sighting, because its crew may have had the wrong viewing angle or insufficient time. It does, however, remove a potentially valuable second observation.
Photographs or calibrated video could have preserved angular size, lighting patterns and movement against fixed landmarks. Ordinary mobile-phone footage would still need careful analysis, but it would be more informative than a short narrative.
Weather and astronomical reconstruction could have tested whether haze, cloud, stars, planets or unusual atmospheric visibility contributed to the appearance.
Identification checks involving local helicopters, police aircraft, authorised drone operations and airport activity could have narrowed the ordinary possibilities.
Without those elements, later investigators cannot reliably distinguish between an unusual drone, a distant aircraft, a visual misjudgement and a genuinely unfamiliar object. The evidence ceiling was largely fixed on the night of the event.
Does “unresolved” make the report more credible?
Unresolved status has two different meanings. It can indicate that investigators examined high-quality evidence and eliminated ordinary explanations. Alternatively, it can mean that the evidence was too incomplete to support any confident conclusion.
Shreveport fits the second category. The report has credible provenance because it originated inside an air-traffic system. Its content is nevertheless thin: coloured lights, approximate positions, uncertain altitude, no confirming aircraft and no public sensor record. The reliability of the witness and the completeness of the evidence are separate questions.
This distinction also appears in federal assessments of military UAP cases. The Office of the Director of National Intelligence reported in 2021 that limited high-quality information prevented firm conclusions and that many incidents probably remained unidentified because of shortcomings in collection and analysis. It warned that unusual apparent behaviour could result from sensor errors, spoofing or observer misperception and required rigorous further study.[DNI]dni.govPrelimary Assessment UAP 20210625Prelimary Assessment UAP 20210625
The same caution applies even more strongly to a single-sensor civilian airport report. An unexplained entry should not be rewritten as a solved drone encounter, because no drone was identified. It should equally not be presented as evidence of a craft with extraordinary capabilities, because none was measured.
What these reports add to Louisiana’s UFO history
Louisiana’s earlier UFO record was shaped largely by newspaper stories, civilian testimony and investigations conducted under programmes such as Project Blue Book. The Shreveport and New Orleans cases show a different modern pattern. Unknown objects now enter the historical record through systems created to manage drones, airspace incursions and aviation safety.
That change improves some aspects of the evidence. Reports may be made promptly, use standard airport identifiers and preserve operational details. It also changes the vocabulary. An object once called a “flying saucer” may now be entered as a UAS, possible drone, unidentified aircraft or UFO/UAS depending on what the observer and controller believe is most operationally useful.
The labels should not be treated as final identifications. A “drone sighting” database can contain observations whose witnesses were unsure that the object was a drone. Conversely, an occurrence containing the word “UFO” may involve nothing more exotic than an aircraft light that could not be recognised during a brief encounter. The category reflects uncertainty within an aviation workflow.
For Louisiana, the central lesson of the Shreveport case is therefore methodological rather than sensational. Official reporting preserved the event, but the attempt at immediate corroboration failed and no later public evidence transformed it into a stronger claim. It remains unresolved because the data ran out—not because the available data demonstrated something beyond ordinary aviation, drones or misidentification.
Amazon book picks
Further Reading
Books and field guides related to Why Do Some Louisiana Pilot Sightings Stay Unresolved?. Use these as the next step if you want deeper reading beyond the article.
UFOs: Generals, Pilots, and Government Officials Go on the Re...
Extensively covers pilot and aviation sightings.
The Report on Unidentified Flying Objects
Provides context for official treatment of unknown aerial reports.
Encounter in Rendlesham Forest
Examines official reporting and unresolved aerial observations.
eBay marketplace picks
Marketplace Samples
Live-tested eBay searches with available results related to this page.
Selected frompilot patch oneBay.co.uk.
Endnotes
1.
Source: twz.com
Link:https://www.twz.com/41573/the-strangest-encounters-with-unidentified-aircraft-weve-found-in-the-faas-huge-database
Source snippet
The Strangest Encounters With Unidentified Aircraft We've Found In The FAA's Huge Database (Updated)...
2.
Source: faa.gov
Link:https://www.faa.gov/foia/electronic_reading_room/logs/afn-20230524-fy21-may21-sep21_0.xlsx
Source snippet
FAA FOIA ReportMOR# SHV-M-2018/01/03-0002 - of Shreveport, LA, on 1/4/18 3. MOR#TUL-M-2018/01/26-0002 - of Tulsa, OK, on 1/26/18. MOR#...
3.
Source: faa.gov
Link:https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Order/JO_7210.632A.pdf
Source snippet
FAA Order JO 7210.632A Air Traffic Organization...September 28, 2020 — 1 Oct 2020 — Any instance where a pilot reports or air traffic...
Published: September 28, 2020
4.
Source: faa.gov
Title: 2020 02 10 JO 7210.632 Chg 1 Briefing Guide JB
Link:https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Order/2020-02-10_JO_7210.632_Chg_1_Briefing_Guide_JB.pdf
Source snippet
JO 7210.632 Chg 1 Briefing GuideTo support these reporting requirements, a mandatory occurrence report (MOR) for UAS operations was in...
5.
Source: faa.gov
Link:https://www.faa.gov/documentlibrary/media/order/faa_jo_7200_23_2.pdf
Source snippet
JO 7200.23 - Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS)3 Oct 2016 — FAA Order JO 7210.632, Air Traffic Organization Occurrence Reporting... Repo...
6.
Source: faa.gov
Link:https://www.faa.gov/uas/resources/public_records/uas_sightings_report
Source snippet
Drone Sightings Near AirportsReports of unmanned aircraft (UAS) sightings from pilots, citizens and law enforcement remain high. The F...
7.
Source: science.nasa.gov
Link:https://science.nasa.gov/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/uap-independent-study-team-final-report.pdf
Source snippet
NASA Science...
8.
Source: asrs.arc.nasa.gov
Title: All submissions are voluntary
Link:https://asrs.arc.nasa.gov/overview/confidentiality.html
Source snippet
Aviation Safety Reporting System - ConfidentialityConfidentiality and Incentives to Report Pilots, air traffic controllers, flight...
9.
Source: asrs.arc.nasa.gov
Title: ASR S Database Online
Link:https://asrs.arc.nasa.gov/search/database.html
10.
Source: dni.gov
Title: Prelimary Assessment UAP 20210625
Link:https://www.dni.gov/files/ODNI/documents/assessments/Prelimary-Assessment-UAP-20210625.pdf
11.
Source: faa.gov
Link:https://www.faa.gov/sites/faa.gov/files/2022-09/fy20-may20-sep20.xlsx
12.
Source: faa.gov
Link:https://www.faa.gov/uas/resources/public_records
13.
Source: faa.gov
Title: 2020 12 23 Notice 7210.928 Reporting Suspicious UAS Activity Final Signed
Link:https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Notice/2020-12-23_Notice_7210.928_Reporting_Suspicious_UAS_Activity_Final_Signed.pdf
14.
Source: faa.gov
Link:https://www.faa.gov/foia/electronic_reading_room/uas
15.
Source: faa.gov
Link:https://www.faa.gov/uas
16.
Source: faa.gov
Title: jo 7200.23a unmanned aircraft systems (uas)
Link:https://www.faa.gov/documentlibrary/media/order/jo_7200.23a_unmanned_aircraft_systems_%28uas%29.pdf
17.
Source: faa.gov
Title: sightings reports
Link:https://www.faa.gov/uas/public_safety_gov/sightings_reports
18.
Source: faa.gov
Title: 7210.3EE Chg 3 dtd 7 9 26 Final
Link:https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Order/7210.3EE_Chg_3_dtd_7-9-26_Final.pdf
19.
Source: faa.gov
Link:https://www.faa.gov/uas/public_safety_gov/sightings_reports/incident_report_questionnaire
20.
Source: faa.gov
Title: notice uas 7210.891
Link:https://www.faa.gov/documentlibrary/media/notice/notice_uas_7210.891.pdf
21.
Source: faa.gov
Title: drone survey
Link:https://www.faa.gov/uas/drone-survey
22.
Source: faa.gov
Title: 7210.3DD Bsc w Chg 1 2 and 3 dtd 9 5 24
Link:https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Order/7210.3DD_Bsc_w_Chg_1_2_and_3_dtd_9-5-24.pdf
23.
Source: faa.gov
Title: discvr tool
Link:https://www.faa.gov/uas/public_safety_gov/discvr_tool
24.
Source: faa.gov
Title: JO 7210.632 ATO with CHG 1
Link:https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Order/JO_7210.632_ATO_with_CHG_1.pdf
25.
Source: faa.gov
Title: traffic management
Link:https://www.faa.gov/uas/advanced_operations/traffic_management
26.
Source: faa.gov
Link:https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Order/JO_7210.632_Chg_1.pdf
27.
Source: faa.gov
Link:https://www.faa.gov/uas/resources
28.
Source: faa.gov
Title: FY2018 Q1 UAS Sightings.xlsx
Link:https://www.faa.gov/sites/faa.gov/files/uas/resources/public_records/uas_sightings_report/FY2018_Q1_UAS_Sightings.xlsx
29.
Source: faa.gov
Title: UAS sightings report 170331.xlsx
Link:https://www.faa.gov/sites/faa.gov/files/uas/resources/public_records/uas_sightings_report/UAS_sightings_report_170331.xlsx
30.
Source: faa.gov
Title: UAS sightings report Apr Jun2017.xlsx
Link:https://www.faa.gov/sites/faa.gov/files/uas/resources/public_records/uas_sightings_report/UAS_sightings_report_Apr_Jun2017.xlsx
31.
Source: faa.gov
Title: UAS sightings report Jan Mar2017.xlsx
Link:https://www.faa.gov/sites/faa.gov/files/uas/resources/public_records/uas_sightings_report/UAS_sightings_report_Jan_Mar2017.xlsx
32.
Source: science.nasa.gov
Link:https://science.nasa.gov/uap/
33.
Source: science.nasa.gov
Link:https://science.nasa.gov/uap/faqs/
34.
Source: nasa.gov
Title: nasa to release discuss unidentified anomalous phenomena report
Link:https://www.nasa.gov/news-release/nasa-to-release-discuss-unidentified-anomalous-phenomena-report/
35.
Source: asrs.arc.nasa.gov
Title: ASRS Program Briefing
Link:https://asrs.arc.nasa.gov/docs/ASRS_ProgramBriefing.pdf
36.
Source: asrs.arc.nasa.gov
Title: cb 317
Link:https://asrs.arc.nasa.gov/publications/callback/cb_317.htm
37.
Source: asrs.arc.nasa.gov
Title: cb 325
Link:https://asrs.arc.nasa.gov/publications/callback/cb_325.htm
38.
Source: asrs.arc.nasa.gov
Link:https://asrs.arc.nasa.gov/publications/callback/cb_555.html
39.
Source: asrs.arc.nasa.gov
Title: cb 455
Link:https://asrs.arc.nasa.gov/publications/callback/cb_455.html
40.
Source: asrs.arc.nasa.gov
Title: cb 555
Link:https://asrs.arc.nasa.gov/docs/cb/cb_555.pdf
41.
Source: asrs.arc.nasa.gov
Title: 60 Case for Confidential Incident Reporting
Link:https://asrs.arc.nasa.gov/docs/rs/60_Case_for_Confidential_Incident_Reporting.pdf
42.
Source: asrs.arc.nasa.gov
Link:https://asrs.arc.nasa.gov/
43.
Source: data.ntsb.gov
Link:https://data.ntsb.gov/carol-repgen/api/Aviation/ReportMain/GenerateNewestReport/94717/pdf
Additional References
44.
Source: youtube.com
Title: Inside the Mysterious Drone Encounter at Barksdale Air Force Base
Link:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VXhY3YFDQKk
Source snippet
US Nuclear Base Under Attack? 'Waves Of Unauthorised Drones Storm…': Shocker Amid Iran War...
45.
Source: youtube.com
Link:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lDOTNco9xxA
Source snippet
Drone Swarm Breaches U.S. Air Force Base...
46.
Source: youtube.com
Title: Drone Swarm Breaches U.S. Air Force Base!
Link:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZVT6TK790Ew
Source snippet
Speaker Johnson said Barksdale and local agencies are working to identify why unauthorized drones...
47.
Source: youtube.com
Title: New details on drone that shut down Louisiana Air Force base
Link:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5IIKMfDRBLA
Source snippet
Inside the Mysterious Drone Encounter at Barksdale Air Force Base...
48.
Source: science.gov
Link:https://www.science.gov/topicpages/u/ultraviolet%2Buv%2Bfilters
49.
Source: facebook.com
Link:https://www.facebook.com/ABC11/posts/a-drone-sighting-that-temporarily-raised-alarms-at-one-of-the-united-states-air-/1392674312893937/
50.
Source: instagram.com
Link:https://www.instagram.com/reel/DWHyyN_Au-b/?hl=en
51.
Source: bigthink.com
Link:https://bigthink.com/science-tech/could-uaps-be-aliens-use-this-11-point-scale-to-evaluate-the-evidence/
52.
Source: archive.org
Link:https://archive.org/stream/b29824060/b29824060_djvu.txt
53.
Source: reddit.com
Link:https://www.reddit.com/r/flying/comments/1d7aagh/got_lasered_last_night/