Case No. 344·United States

2026·Sensitive national security site, western U.S. (undisclosed location)

United States.Two nights of slow thermal objects, calibrated against a Black Hawk

In 2026, security personnel at a sensitive federal site detected an anomalous radio-frequency emission, aimed a thermal camera at the indicated bearing, and filmed two black objects moving slowly in formation above a mountain range. The following night, another agent observed, from the same post, a thermally 'hot' object —unlike the 'cold' ones the night before— on a similar heading, and deliberately compared its size to a U.S. Army Black Hawk helicopter he filmed as a reference: the object measured roughly half its size. Neither witness could determine the aircraft type, propulsion, or exact configuration.

Year

2026

Tier

A

Probability

20%

Category

Incident

Institutional evidence: multiple verifiable witnesses or official documentation. Three independent axes: the «tier» measures the strength of the evidence; the «probability» estimates how genuinely unexplained the case is —a natural phenomenon can remain unexplained, so it does not equal «non-prosaic»—; and the partition of explanations (below) says what it most plausibly was. So a well-documented case can have a possible hoax as its most plausible cause, and a Tier B is not, for that reason, a hoax.

Primary documents · viewer

Cargando visor…

FBI-UAP-D032 — FD-302, first night: RF detection and thermal observation

Federal Bureau of Investigation (PURSUE Release 05) · Dominio público · US Government work · open original

Cargando visor…

FBI-UAP-D033 — FD-302, second night: size comparison against a Black Hawk

Federal Bureau of Investigation (PURSUE Release 05) · Dominio público · US Government work · open original

Part 01

The night in question

In 2026, a security employee at a sensitive federal site in the western U.S. —with no aviation training but some private pilot flight time— was on shift with a colleague when, at approximately 1604 hours, he was alerted to a radio-frequency detection: a 5-to-10-second burst emission at roughly 10,000 feet MSL, on an initially unknown bearing. Further communication clarified a request to observe on bearing 58 degrees. Within a few minutes, the witness aimed a thermal optical device in that direction and saw a black object in the sky, moving slowly. He took photographs using the optical device itself. While observing, a second object appeared to the right of the first, and he took additional photos and video. Both objects moved together, at the same speed, and appeared 'black hot' —i.e., cooler than the background— in the thermal image. He lost sight of them as they moved out of range. Total observation time was about 5 to 10 minutes; he could not estimate exact altitude or speed. The objects were flying above the mountain line, heading southeast, roughly 58 to 62 degrees. He was the only person present who saw them, and the only one who used the optical device; the photographs were provided to the FBI agent who took his statement.

The following night, an FBI Special Agent, positioned in the same general observation area, filmed a thermally 'elevated' aerial object —that is, hot, unlike the cold objects from the previous night— in the same general western sector and on a similar heading. The object appeared roughly two ridgelines farther west than the prior night's observation point; given the greater distance and terrain separation, the agent could not identify specific physical characteristics or determine its exact configuration, but the object presented as hot on thermal observation and appeared to be flying southbound, consistent with the general direction observed the previous night. During the same operational period, the agent also recorded video of a U.S. Army Black Hawk helicopter operating in the same general area, with the explicit purpose of establishing a visual and thermal reference point for scale, flight characteristics, and comparative size assessment. Based on that comparison, the unidentified object appeared to be approximately half the size of the Black Hawk —an estimate based solely on observed appearance, distance, and available reference footage. The agent could not determine whether it was fixed-wing, rotary-wing, or another type of unmanned aerial system, and eventually lost sight of the object as it continued southbound and was lost to terrain and distance.

Part 02

Why this case moved the needle

Against the more narratively striking files in this batch, this case earns its place through method, not drama. The RF-detection → thermal-camera → photography sequence is, in essence, a surveillance protocol working exactly as designed: someone detects an anomalous emission, points an optical sensor at the indicated bearing, and documents what they find. That what they found were two black objects moving slowly in formation is not, on its own, evidence of anything anomalous — it's directly consistent with a pair of commercial or military drones operating near a sensitive facility, precisely the scenario an RF detection system is built to flag.

The second statement contributes more methodological discipline than narrative substance: the agent, aware he couldn't judge the object's size without a reference, deliberately filmed a known Black Hawk in the same area to calibrate the comparison — a rigor uncommon in the genre, which reduces (without eliminating) the margin of error on the 'half a Black Hawk' estimate. That the first night's object appeared 'cold' (black hot) and the second's 'hot' is a difference that could reflect different viewing angles, different surface types, or simply two genuinely different objects with no necessary relation — the file doesn't resolve it.

The posterior reflects that conservative reading: the largest mass sits on `mundano_natural` (0.55, `misid`) because an RF-detected drone swarm is, by far, the most parsimonious explanation for slow, formation-flying objects with no extraordinary maneuvers, near a national-security installation. The case enters the corpus not because it's extraordinary, but because it's exactly the kind of routine, technical, undramatic file that makes up most of real UAP investigative work — the necessary counterweight to the more spectacular cases in the same batch.

Part 03

What's left on paper

Documented evidence

  1. Radio-frequency detection alert (5-10s burst, ~10,000 ft MSL) triggers directed thermal observation (bearing 58°)
  2. Two black objects ('black hot' on thermal) moving together slowly above a mountain line, heading southeast; photos and video captured
  3. Second night: an FBI Special Agent observes a thermally 'hot' object on a similar heading, two ridgelines farther west
  4. The agent deliberately films a Black Hawk helicopter as a scale reference: the unidentified object measures ~half its size
  5. Neither witness could determine aircraft type (fixed-wing, rotary-wing, or UAS), propulsion, or exact configuration
  6. Both observations made by security/FBI personnel at the same sensitive federal site, on consecutive nights

Sources

  1. war.gov/UFO — FBI-UAP-D032, FD-302 primera noche (PURSUE Release 05) Document embedded in this case's viewer.
  2. war.gov/UFO — FBI-UAP-D033, FD-302 segunda noche (PURSUE Release 05) Document embedded in this case's viewer.

Location

Sensitive national security site, western U.S. (undisclosed location) · 39.00°, -116.00°

Distribution of explanations

This case is classified among the model's hypotheses: the bar splits 100% by how much each explanation weighs (the uncertainty is spread across the hypotheses the case supports). Summed across the corpus they produce the comparable partition. It is a different question from the Probability above: that one estimates how likely the case is a genuinely unexplained phenomenon; this one splits which the explanation would be.

Misidentification67%
Classified human technology18%
Adversary technology6%
Non-human + state cover-up6%
Non-human, no state management3%

Modal hypothesis: Misidentification 67% · sums to 100%

Structured analytical judgment, not a calibrated frequency. Forced classification: the mass the evidence cannot assign is spread across the hypotheses the case does support.

Related cases