ENCOUNTER / RADAR / INFRARED

THE
NIMITZ ENCOUNTER.

A Navy training group, unusual radar reports, two crews sent to investigate, and an infrared video whose limits matter as much as its provenance.

14 NOVEMBER 2004PACIFIC OCEANFILE 003—N

OBJECT
UNIDENTIFIED

EDITORIAL OCEAN VISUAL / NOT A PHOTOGRAPH OF THE ENCOUNTER

OVERVIEW ACCOUNTS TIMELINE THE RECORD WATCH

THE SHORT VERSIONAC / 003-N

In November 2004, personnel associated with the USS Nimitz carrier strike group reported unusual radar tracks during training off Southern California. On November 14, F/A-18 crews were redirected to investigate an unknown contact.

Commander David Fravor and Lieutenant Commander Alex Dietrich later described seeing a white, wingless, oblong object above disturbed water. A different flight later recorded an infrared target in the area. That recording became known as FLIR1 and was officially released by the Department of Defense in 2020.

The event is significant because it combines reported radar activity, trained-witness accounts and authentic Navy infrared footage. But the public does not have the raw radar package or enough range and flight data to prove that every report describes the same object, calculate its absolute speed, or identify its origin.

Reading the file: DoD authenticated the released video as Navy imagery and said the phenomenon remained unidentified. “Authentic video” confirms provenance; it does not confirm an extraordinary interpretation.

01 / THREE EVIDENCE STREAMS

ONE CASE.
SEPARATE RECORDS.

Radar reports, a short visual intercept and a later infrared recording are often combined in retellings. The public record does not yet demonstrate continuous identity across them.

A / USS PRINCETON

Unusual radar tracks.

Princeton radar operators, including Senior Chief Kevin Day, later described contacts appearing over a number of days. Day said tracks showed abrupt altitude changes and descents. Their reports helped prompt the intercept. The complete, calibrated raw radar package and system logs have not been released for independent reconstruction, so precise speeds, altitudes and tracks remain reported values rather than publicly reproducible measurements.

OPERATOR TESTIMONY / RAW DATA NOT PUBLIC

B / VISUAL INTERCEPT

Fravor and Dietrich’s accounts.

On November 14, two F/A-18F crews were directed to an unknown contact. Fravor and Dietrich described a white, smooth, wingless object, often compared to a Tic Tac, above a patch of disturbed water. Fravor described the object maneuvering in relation to his aircraft and then moving away. The encounter was brief; distance and range were not measured, which limits calculations of size and performance.

PILOT TESTIMONY / NO CONTEMPORANEOUS OPTICAL PHOTO

C / FLIR1

A later infrared recording.

A subsequent Navy flight, commonly associated with pilot Chad Underwood, recorded an infrared target using an ATFLIR pod. Underwood has said he used “Tic Tac” to describe its appearance on the display. DoD authenticated the clip as Navy imagery. The publicly released segment does not include absolute range, full sensor metadata or a continuous track that would independently reproduce extreme acceleration claims.

AUTHENTIC NAVY VIDEO / KINEMATICS UNRESOLVED

D / THE INTERPRETATION

Unidentified is not a verdict.

Fravor and other witnesses have said the object’s reported behavior seemed unlike familiar aircraft. Others have proposed classified technology, sensor effects, viewing geometry or an ordinary object seen under unusual conditions. None of these explanations has been established as the definitive answer. The public evidence does not prove extraterrestrial origin, advanced propulsion or even that the radar, visual and FLIR events were one continuous target.

ORIGIN / NOT ESTABLISHED

Interview still from a later account of the Nimitz Tic Tac encounter — FRAVOR INTERVIEW VIDEO STILL / LATER RETELLING

FIELD NOTE 03

FLIR1 is not a recording of Fravor’s close visual encounter. It is a later infrared recording from another flight.

TWO SOURCES / DO NOT MERGE THE FOOTAGE

02 / PUBLIC RECORD

FROM TRAINING RANGE
TO HEADLINES.

This timeline distinguishes the reported operational sequence from the later public release and retellings.

EARLY NOV 2004

Princeton radar reports

Operators later said anomalous contacts appeared during training off the California coast. Those radar reports are part of the witnesses’ account and the history of the intercept; raw returns needed to independently test the reported performance have not been released publicly.

RADAR / REPORTED TRACKS

14 NOV 2004

Two F/A-18 crews investigate

Fravor and Dietrich’s crews were redirected to an unknown contact. The pilots later described a white object and disturbed water. Their first-person accounts establish what they reported seeing, not the object’s measured size, speed or source.

VISUAL ENCOUNTER / WITNESS ACCOUNTS

LATER SORTIE

Infrared target recorded

A subsequent flight recorded the target on an ATFLIR pod. The short clip circulated publicly years later. The available record does not contain a released, continuous multi-sensor track linking the FLIR footage to every earlier radar and visual report.

FLIR1 / DIFFERENT FLIGHT

2017—2020

Public attention and official release

Major reporting in 2017 brought the encounter and a Pentagon program into wider public discussion. In April 2020, DoD authorized release of three Navy videos, including the November 2004 footage, and said the phenomena remained characterized as unidentified.

MEDIA COVERAGE / DOD VIDEO AUTHENTICATION

26 JUL 2023

Fravor testifies to Congress

Fravor gave a written statement and testified at a House subcommittee hearing on unidentified anomalous phenomena. This is a separate, formal congressional proceeding from the original flight event; his sworn account is one evidence stream among the records and sensor data sought for the case.

HOUSE OVERSIGHT / PUBLIC TESTIMONY

Pacific Ocean waves, editorial visual for the offshore training area

EASTERN PACIFIC / EDITORIAL OCEAN VISUAL

03 / LOCATION & CONTEXT

A TRAINING AREA.
AN UNKNOWN CONTACT.

The encounter occurred during U.S. Navy training off Southern California, associated with the Nimitz Carrier Strike Group and the guided-missile cruiser USS Princeton. Training airspace and sensor systems matter to the case: they frame why aircraft were launched and what the radar and infrared systems could observe.

The released video’s authenticity does not supply the missing geometry. Without target range, complete sensor metadata, raw radar returns and a cross-sensor time correlation, observers cannot derive a verified speed or establish that every report concerned one object.

2004NAVY TRAINING PERIOD14 NOVVISUAL INTERCEPT2020DOD RELEASE

READ THE DOD STATEMENT ↗

04 / CLAIM VS. CHECK

WHAT THE RECORD
CAN SUPPORT.

Public evidence supports an important unresolved encounter. Several popular performance claims require measurements that are not public.

QUESTIONWHAT WAS REPORTEDWHAT CAN BE CHECKED

Radar

Princeton personnel reported unusual tracks over several days, including rapid changes in altitude.

Public accounts describe the reports, but the raw calibrated radar data and complete system context needed to calculate motion are not publicly available.

Visual sighting

Two F/A-18 crews reported a white, wingless object and disturbed water during the November 14 intercept.

Fravor and Dietrich have given first-person accounts; no contemporaneous high-resolution optical image or measured range is publicly available to independently establish geometry or absolute performance.

FLIR1

A Navy ATFLIR pod recorded an infrared target on a later sortie.

DoD authenticated the Navy video and released it in 2020. The clip does not by itself identify the target or provide the range and complete metadata needed to prove extraordinary acceleration.

One continuous target?

Retellings often combine the radar reports, visual intercept and FLIR1 into one continuous encounter.

The operational context connects them, but public material does not establish uninterrupted sensor correlation or prove all three streams captured one object.

Origin

Some commentators argue the object’s reported behavior points to non-human technology.

No publicly available physical object or verified technical data establishes extraterrestrial origin. “Unidentified” describes the unresolved classification, not a determination about source.

IMPORTANT DISTINCTIONDoD’s authentication establishes that the video is genuine Navy imagery. It does not endorse a particular explanation for what appears in it.

05 / WATCH THE RECORD

THE ACCOUNT.
THE SENSOR CLIP.

The interview preserves a witness account. DoD’s release page provides the official statement about the Navy video.

01 / FRAVOR INTERVIEWTHIRD-PARTY YOUTUBE UPLOAD / INTERVIEW, NOT FLIR1

YOUTUBE / EXTERNAL VIDEO LINKS ↗

Each thumbnail opens its matching video in a new tab.

02 / 24HUFO / RE-UPLOADCOMMANDER FRAVOR’S TIC TAC ENCOUNTERInterview excerpt / YouTube ↗

READING THE FILE

SOURCES &
FURTHER READING.

OFFICIAL VIDEO RECORDDepartment of Defense / Statement on release of historical Navy videos / 27 April 2020↗ PRIMARY TESTIMONYDavid Fravor / Written statement to House Oversight / 26 July 2023↗ INTERVIEW & REPORTINGCBS News / Navy pilots recall “unsettling” 2004 UAP sighting / 60 Minutes↗ CONTEMPORARY REPORTINGThe New York Times / Glowing Auras and “Black Money”: The Pentagon’s Mysterious U.F.O. Program↗ TECHNICAL ANALYSISKnuth, Powell & Reali / Estimating Flight Characteristics of Anomalous Unidentified Aerial Vehicles / 2019↗

The Nimitz record combines later testimony, an authenticated Navy video and radar accounts for which complete raw data are not public. Sources do not establish non-human origin.

KEEP THE RECORD.
LEAVE THE ORIGIN OPEN.

← RETURN TO THE OPEN FILES

THENIMITZ ENCOUNTER.

ONE CASE.SEPARATE RECORDS.