[contact]

[legal & copyright]



Available Video Footage
 Trollstigen1 Jul 2018
YouTube: adRsfMwpnQk★★☆☆☆
 Queen Valley (AZ)5 Apr 2018
YouTube: 4KeZ7Pzbd9U★★★★
 Suchá14 Oct 2017
YouTube: lnIUh2bPxu0★★★★★
 Crucea de Piatră3 Oct 2017
YouTube: P-iFx3VIiQ0★★★★★
 Crucea de Piatră14 Sep 2017
YouTube: mWvP3QG18v0★★★★
 Fort St. John (BC)3 Sep 2017
YouTube: d3ajks8OHCo★★★★★
 Weert25 May 2017
YouTube: h0s_P74oQD4★★★★
 Port Tabacco (MD)18 Mar 2017
YouTube: 2wII24qSpDw★★★★
 Volgograd (VGG)18 Mar 2017
YouTube: _p_inSwZcPQ★★★☆☆
 Charles Town (WV)Feb 2017
YouTube: JJpSYozvasc★★★★
 RugeleySummer 2016
YouTube: mgrI0MHZQQc★★★☆☆
 New York City (NY)Jul 2016
YouTube: QGKkhZE2Fk0★★☆☆☆
 Ayden (NC)16 Oct 2016
YouTube: 6BUA6zdbgEE★★★★
 Nueva Talcuna24 Mar 2016
YouTube: O9R1wMq0VOI★★☆☆☆
 Maryland Point (MD)12 Dec 2015
YouTube: 9P2A8m7RgnA★★★★★
 Sion13 Nov 2015
YouTube: dNrtU1z_5EQ★★★☆☆
 Westbury26 Sep 2015
YouTube: VjW_QyXtyHA★★★★★

 Trollstigen, 1 Jul 2018


 Abstract  In this video a white object passes the drone from below with an extremely high speed along a straight or almost straight trajectory. Another object from a slightly different direction passes directly under the drone again only 15 seconds later. In this footage the objects are only seen in very few frames, due to their extreme speed in the video and the unfavorable camera angle. A white insect flying very close in front of the camera lens cannot be completely excluded by the given data. However, the evolvement of smear effect in comparison to the objects' stipulated angle to the lens compares very well with better cases of WFM and suggests that the data is well explained by the occurrence of a genuine WFM. The case is particularly interesting due to its location in Scandinavia and the rare occasions of WFM footage from this region.


Video Info
Source:YouTube.com/watch?v=adRsfMwpnQk
User:Jesper Adolfsson 
Published:11 Jul 2018
Resolution:1080p
Frame rate:60fps
Drone model: likely DJI Mavic Air
Files: archived original description and comments on YouTube
Content Info
Viewpoint*: 62.45573, 7.667688goo.gl/maps/XduAYKDY4Y32
Time: 01 Jul 2018 18:43 (Central European Summer Time, UTC+02:00)
Weather: 21°C, 984.6hPa, 33% humid., 15 km/h wind WNWmore 
Object Analysis Results
Appears in frames:3072 to 3075 (00:51:200 to 00:51:250 m:s:ms)
Object's direction:NE to SW
Data insufficient to estimate passed distance and traveling speed


Data Reliability and Quality

As of today (August 2018), the originator's YouTube channel has only two uploads. Both are from July 2018. The two videos show drone footage of two different locations in western Norway. The here linked video is specifically devoted to the capture of an UFO, the other video shows scenes in a picturesque Norwegian landscape with hikers who are family members of the originator. Seemingly, the channel's name is derived from the originator's real name and a person's photograph is shown as the channel icon. The YouTube user created four playlists and some liked videos, but none of them point to a specific interest in UFO related topics. However, next to sports and music, an Apollo 10 documentary and a video of a Meteorite crash in Russia are liked. Overall, like many others in my list of cases, this channel looks like the genuine account of someone who has very common interests, which include doing sports, being outside and filming drone footage for fun.

The quality of the footage is good due to the high frame rate (60 fps) but the resolution (1080p) could be better. This footage is not as relevant as others, because we cannot see the object approaching from a far distance due to unfavourable angles of view and the object's approach. However, cases of WFM footage from Scandinavia are rare.

Smear Effect

As figure 1 shows, the object is seen with the very noticeable smear effect. The change of the smear's length is consistent with an object change of viewing angle caused by an object that approaches the lens from afar.

Fig 1. Slowed and enlarged view of the first object in all frames in which it is shown.

Figure 2 shows that the second object is captured with a similar smear effect. The object can only be seen with its full clear shape in one frame and a further analysis is not possible.

Fig 2. Slowed and enlarged view of the second object in the frame it is shown most clear.

Object's Trajectory

It is very noticeable that in both cases the objects approach the drone and pass it directly below it. Assuming this case shows genuine WFMs, it provides further support for the hypothesis that WFM pass drones closely in an intentional manner. This is noticeable in some other cases (e.g. 2wII24qSpDw, JJpSYozvasc, VjW_QyXtyHA).

The first object approaches the drone in a straight line or a very slight curve with a very big radius. Figure 3 shows the analysis.

Fig 3. Analysis of first object's travel path in all frames in which it is visible.

The second object approaches the drone in a straight line and from an only slightly other direction than the first object. Figure 4 shows the analysis.

Fig 4. Analysis of second object's travel path in all frames in which it is visible.

Speed Estimation

Since the object cannot be seen to approach from a very far distance the common technique to estimate a travel speed using an estimate of the passed distance cannot be applied. However, some rough estimations can be put forward with reference to other cases of possible WFM filmed with comparable equipment. The comparisons include dNrtU1z_5EQ, 4KeZ7Pzbd9U and h0s_P74oQD4. Therefore, the object travels with more than one times the speed of sound, if it is not an insect very close to the lens that produces a very unlucky case of a false positive for a WFM.

Appendix

Fig A.1. Distance between camera and nearest publicly available weather station at Førde Airport, Bringeland.


* Geographic coordinates are given as a vector of latitudes and longitudes in format WGS 84 as used by Google maps.

† The detailed point in time of the capture was stated by the originator of the footage.

 
 
Contact Donate Legal & Copyrights Author

© whitefastmovers.org 2018-2024