File / gofast-2015
GOFAST
A US Navy infrared recording of January 2015 in which a small object seems to race low over the ocean. AARO puts it at about 13,000 feet and finds “no anomalous performance characteristics”, but “cannot definitively identify the object”
In January 2015 a US Navy F/A-18F crew recorded with an infrared sensor a small object that seems to race low over the ocean; the Department of Defense released the clip in 2020. In a case resolution of February 2025 AARO worked out from the numbers on the display that the object flew at about 13,000 feet, and assessed “with high confidence that the object did not move at anomalous speeds”. It attributes the impression of speed to “motion parallax”. NASA’s independent study team had reached the same altitude in 2023. AARO adds: “AARO cannot definitively identify the object, but it displayed no anomalous performance characteristics.”
Official position
AARO, case resolution of 6 February 2025: “AARO cannot definitively identify the object, but it displayed no anomalous performance characteristics.” and “The object’s apparent high speed is attributable to motion parallax.” NASA’s independent study team, 2023: “the impression of rapid motion is at least partly due to the high velocity of the sensor, coupled with the parallax effect” (p. 28). The Department of Defense, releasing the recording in 2020, wrote that the Navy had acknowledged it as a Navy video; that does not identify the object.
Alternative hypotheses
- A small object drifting with the wind, as NASA’s study team suggests: “This further supports the conjecture that the object is most likely drifting with the wind.” (p. 28) Its estimate of about 40 mph neglects the wind acting on the aircraft. AARO, taking the wind into account, gives speeds from 72 to 161 mph depending on the object’s heading relative to the wind, with the wind at the object’s height at 69 mph, and notes that “there is a range of winds where the object is moving generally at windspeed and in the direction of the wind”.
- Something about the size of “a small drone or bird”. AARO says it “could not determine the object’s size due to the video’s low resolution and the range from the sensor to the object”, but pixel analysis by one of its partners “suggested the object was one meter or less in size - comparable to a small drone or bird”.
What can be opened
- The recording, “3 - GOFAST.wmv”, in the Navy FOIA reading room: 34.5 seconds with sound (our measurement). The Department of Defense released it with two other Navy videos on 27 April 2020 and dates it to January 2015.
- AARO’s case resolution of 6 February 2025 and its Appendix A, which works through the calculation step by step.
- The final report of NASA’s independent study team on UAP (2023), whose page 28 analyses the video.
- AARO’s slide on the case for a Senate subcommittee, 19 November 2024: “Event: In January 2015, U.S. Navy aircraft recorded an object appearing to travel at high speeds close to the ocean surface off Florida’s east coast.”
What the numbers on the display give
AARO lists what the display shows: “The range (distance) from the FLIR sensor to the target.”, “The FLIR camera’s azimuth (left-right angle) and elevation (up-down angle).”, and “The aircraft’s altitude, speed, and tilt (bank angle).” From the angles and the range alone it places the object at about 13,000 feet: “There is high confidence in this result as it required only the sensor pointing angles and range to target.” NASA’s study team found the same altitude.
The speed is less certain. NASA, over a 22-second interval, found “an average speed of 40 mph. This is a typical wind speed at 13,000 feet.”, and added: “Our calculation has neglected wind effects on the aircraft, and thus there is uncertainty in this result.” (p. 28) AARO’s slide of 2024 gives “approximately 45 mph / 39 knots”, with winds of “approximately 60 knots at 13,000 feet”. The case resolution of 2025 goes further: “The object’s speed ranged from about 32 m/s (72 mph) to 72 m/s (161 mph) depending on its heading relative to the wind.” It explains why it gives a range: “The aircraft’s exact location and heading (compass direction) during the recording are unknown.” and “AARO could not calculate a single speed or heading for the object because the aircraft’s calculated flight path depends on its exact heading, and the object’s calculated location depends on the aircraft’s location.” In none of its simulations did the object move against the wind.
Why it looks fast
AARO: “The object’s apparent high speed is attributable to motion parallax. Motion parallax is an optical effect that induces an observer to perceive that a stationary or slow-moving object is moving much faster” when seen from a moving platform. NASA: “The video gives an impression of an object skimming above the ocean at a great velocity. But analysis of the numerical information on the display reveals a less extraordinary interpretation.” (p. 28)
What is not known
What the object was: “AARO cannot definitively identify the object”. Where exactly it was: “High confidence analysis of the UAP’s exact position was not possible given a lack of precise positional data from the observing Navy aircraft.” (slide, 2024) AARO worked from the public copy “because the original file and its accompanying metadata are no longer available”, and could not obtain the aircrew’s accounts. The other Navy video of January 2015, GIMBAL, has no such resolution: AARO lists it as unresolved.
Why this scores where it does
Witnesses: 2. One aircrew, not named: “AARO sought but was unable to obtain witness accounts from the F/A-18F aircrew.”
Radar: 1. No radar record can be opened. The one distance in the case is “The range (distance) from the FLIR sensor to the target.” on the recording’s display, which AARO used for the altitude (case resolution, Appendix A).
Optics: 4. The infrared recording with the figures on its display, from which AARO worked out an altitude of about 13,000 feet; NASA’s study team found the same altitude. Not 5: “the original file and its accompanying metadata are no longer available”.
Physical trace: 0. None.
Multi-channel: 2. The image and the figures on its display come from one sensor; no second sensor and no crew account can be opened.
Documentation: 4. AARO’s case resolution with a worked appendix, the analysis of NASA’s study team (p. 28) and AARO’s slide for a Senate subcommittee in 2024. Not 5: no report from the flight can be opened, and the aircraft’s position and heading are unknown.
Anomaly: 1. AARO assessed “with high confidence that the object did not move at anomalous speeds” and puts the impression of speed down to motion parallax; what remains is that it “cannot definitively identify the object”.
Data today: 4. Anyone can recompute the altitude from the public clip, as AARO and NASA’s study team did; the speed stays a range, because “The aircraft’s exact location and heading (compass direction) during the recording are unknown.”
The overall is 2.2: class C, material gaps.
What would settle it
The aircraft’s position and heading during the recording, the original file with its metadata, and the crew’s own accounts. AARO says the file and metadata no longer exist and that it could not obtain the accounts.
← All case files