Strange US Navy UAP incidents in July of 2019 raises pressing questions

 An excellent UAP investigation and article by Adam Kehoe and Marc Cecotti for The Drive/The War Zone. Their article is from March 23, 2021, and you can read it at this link: 

• https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/39913/multiple-destroyers-were-swarmed-by-mysterious-drones-off-california-over-numerous-nights

In the article's first paragraph, the authors write what the article is about:

[I]n July of 2019, a truly bizarre series of events unfolded around California’s Channel Islands. Over a number of days, groups of unidentified aircraft, which the U.S. Navy simply refers to as ‘drones’ or 'UAVs,' pursued that service's vessels, prompting a high-level investigation.

Then what follows is Kehoe and Cecotti's own investigation into the details of the bizarre series of "UAV" incidents in July 2019. The details come largely from the authors' Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests.

My purpose with this post is mainly to share the excellent article in question, and also to make a few and short comments about the "UAV" incidents as described in the article.

 My first comment is on the US Navy´s designation of the unknown flying objects as "UAV" (Unmanned Aerial Systems) or "drones." Why not "Unidentified Aerial Phenomena" (UAP)? The US Navy´s "new" (rather "modified") guidelines for reporting UAP (that is, UFOs) is at the moment classified information, so I can only speculate. In these new guidelines, is "UAV" now the standard term instead of "UAP" for incidents like the ones in the article?

 

And how do you differentiate between when one designation is more appropriate than the other? I am asking because in my mind the incidents in July 2019, as they are described in Kehoe's and Cecotti's article, seems to fit the designation "UAP" more than "drones". Why bother at all with guidelines for reporting UAP, if incidents like the ones in July 2019 are called "UAV" or drones? Because as I read the article, it seems far from clear that the unknown flying and hovering objects should be designated as "UAV" or "drones" rather than "UAP".

So, it would be interesting to read the US Navy's "new" guidelines for reporting UAP sightings/encounters/incidents to get a clearer picture of when and how the different designations should be used. 

There may be logical explanations for my aforementioned questions. For example, you might use the designation "UAV" initially at the event, and only later, after investigating a sighting/incident, replace it with "UAP" if the investigation cannot identify or explain what was seen and registered during a particular sighting/incident/encounter.

My second and last comment is based on a "hunch" or a gut-feeling. I share the authors' view that the July 2019 UAP or UAV incidents bring up "increasingly pressing questions," as they state in the article's last section. 

I cannot make up my mind whether the unknown flying and hovering objects are man made or something else. In this case of July 2019, my gut-feeling says the UAV, or UAP, are man-made. At the moment, I do not have any logical or empirical reasons to back up my "hunch". But there is something "off" with these incidents, and I do not mean "off" in the sense of "aliens". 

Maybe some aspects of Salvatore Pais´patents and inventions are operational after all? (Pais´patents could also be disinformation to put the Chinese and the Russians on the wrong track regarding the science behind some advanced military applications).

I do not know if the science behind Pais´patents is feasible, but we have to ask which explanation is more likely or extraordinary about the objects detected in July 2019: man-made technology and science or something not of this earth? 

In the same moment as I ask that question, I realise it is becoming less clear how to differentiate between what is likely and what is extraordinary in cases like the USS Nimitz "Tic Tac" encounter(s) in 2004 and the USS Kidd "UAV" incidents in July 2019.

Take care!