FLIR, Gimbal, GoFast: An Explainer

Three short Navy targeting-pod videos, FLIR (aka “FLIR1” from the 2004 Nimitz event), Gimbal (2015, East Coast), and GoFast (2015, East Coast) have shaped the modern discourse on UAP. They are real U.S. Navy recordings; the Pentagon formally released them in April 2020 and NAVAIR hosts the files in an official FOIA library. But the clips are not science-grade telemetry packages; they’re compressed snippets from AN/ASQ-series targeting pods designed for weapons employment, not precision photogrammetry. That matters: what looks wild can often be explained by sensor artifacts (glares, image processing), gimbal/derotation behaviors, and motion parallax from an observer (the jet) moving hundreds of knots. Recent AARO work formalized this for GoFast, showing the apparent “skimming” object is ~13,000 ft above sea level and that the perceived extreme speed is a parallax illusion. ODNI annual UAP reports add policy framing: UAP reports are increasing, most are unresolved due to limited data, and some are likely ordinary objects seen under challenging conditions. Director of National Intelligence U.S. Department of War

This explainer walks case-by-case (FLIR, Gimbal, GoFast), demystifies the symbology, spells out the artifacts and parallax math, and points to official documents and FOIA repositories. We close with a UAPedia claims taxonomy, clear speculation labels, and the implications for future evidence collection.

Provenance: what is officially acknowledged?

• Authenticity: The Pentagon authorized public release of the three Navy videos on April 27, 2020, “to clear up any misconception on whether the footage was real.” NAVAIR’s FOIA reading room hosts GIMBAL.mp4, FLIR.mp4, and GOFAST for public download. U.S. Department of War
• U.S. Navy confirmation: The Navy previously acknowledged the videos are genuine UAP captures by naval aviators. TIME
• ODNI framing: The Preliminary Assessment (2021) and Annual Reports (2022, 2023) describe UAP as a safety and national-security concern, note increasing reports, and emphasize insufficient data in most cases, without endorsing exotic conclusions. Director of National Intelligence
• AARO (DoD) technicals: AARO’s information papers explain forced perspective & parallax and post official imagery links. AARO’s GoFast case resolution (2025) models the kinematics from the on-screen numbers and concludes the object’s apparent speed is due to motion parallax, not extraordinary performance. AARO

Primer: what the pods and overlays are

The videos are taken through a forward-looking infrared (FLIR) targeting pod (ATFLIR family) that can display:

• IR polarity (white-hot/black-hot).
• Zoom/FOV and track mode (e.g., IR lock).
• Sensor azimuth/elevation relative to the aircraft boresight.
• Sometimes range, but only if the pod has a solution (e.g., laser, radar, or correlated mode).

They don’t necessarily include: georeferenced sensor metadata, airframe position/heading, INS/IMU logs, or synchronized radar tracks. That’s why “it looks fast” in a 34-second crop isn’t proof of high absolute speed, and why parallax can dominate perception. AARO notes these recordings are not intended for detailed ISR exploitation; compression and missing metadata constrain analysis. AARO

Core optical/sensor effects to understand

1. Motion parallax (from the fast-moving aircraft): nearby backgrounds (sea/terrain/clouds) and a slow or stationary distant object will appear to “zip” the opposite way across the field of view. The faster the platform and the narrower the FOV, the stronger the effect. AARO’s primer and the GoFast resolution card illustrate this with equations and wind-corrected scenarios. AARO
2. Gimbal/derotation & glare: Targeting pods include image derotation to keep the horizon “upright” as internal optics rotate. Bright point-like heat sources can produce glare/flare in the optical train that may rotate as the pod compensates, yielding a rotating diamond/oval that is not the true object’s body. (Public analyses of Gimbal propose that the rotation we see is glare coupled to derotation, not the craft rolling; several explainers and photo/video-tech outlets have walked through this.) The Guardian
3. Range illusion: Without an independent range solution, humans infer size/speed from angular rates, which breaks down under parallax. AARO’s GoFast analysis shows the altitude and speed can be solved within bounds from the on-screen angles and range readout alone, and those bounds are mundane. AARO

Case A – GoFast (2015, East Coast)

What the video shows

A small white hotspot is locked by the pod and appears to streak over the ocean. The crew cheers when the tracker finally grabs it. The on-screen data include sensor azimuth/elevation, FOV, aircraft altitude/speed, and, critically for this clip, pod range to the target.

What AARO actually did

In February 2025, AARO published a case-resolution card & methodology derived from the public 34-second file (original raw + full metadata were not available). They extracted range and angles, reconstructed possible aircraft headings, corrected for winds at 13,000 ft (object) and 25,000 ft (jet), and computed a family of solutions. Key findings:

• Altitude: object ≈ 13,000 ft MSL (high confidence; depends only on sensor angles + range).
• Speeds: depending on relative wind and aircraft heading, the object ranged from moving with the wind at nearly windspeed to at most ~90 mph faster than the wind.
• Conclusion: No anomalous performance demonstrated; the “fast over water” impression is motion parallax. AARO

AARO explicitly notes that these weapon-system videos aren’t built for forensic ISR; still, even with the limited display data, the parallax explanation fits the numbers and wind fields. AARO

Takeaway: GoFast looks extraordinary because the observer is. At ~Mach 0.6–0.7 in a narrow FOV, almost anything at a different range can be made to look like it’s screaming by.

Case B – Gimbal (2015, East Coast)

What the video shows

A bright, roughly oval IR source moves against a cloud backdrop. At about 0:22, the object’s image rotates, prompting pilot remarks (“It’s rotating”). The shape appears to tip/roll as the clip proceeds.

Competing interpretations (data and artifacts)

• Glare + derotation hypothesis (prominent in technical analyses): The ATFLIR optical train can generate glare around very bright sources (e.g., hot jet exhaust). With image derotation active, the glare pattern can rotate relative to the stabilized horizon, even if the underlying object does not physically roll. Photography and imaging specialists have pointed to analogous behavior in other systems; explainers trace how aperture geometry and internal reflections produce rotational artifacts. PetaPixel
• What do officials say? The DOD has not released a specific technical resolution of Gimbal akin to GoFast. AARO’s official UAP imagery page lists Gimbal under “unresolved case” with the NAVAIR FOIA link, the emphasis is on provenance, not on endorsing any particular explanation. AARO
• What the data don’t show: No independent range or size is embedded in the clip; no public multi-sensor package (e.g., synchronized radar tracks, pod metadata logs) has been released that would fix distance and true kinematics. That open-data gap is why artifact-versus-object arguments persist. Naval Air Systems Command

Takeaway: The rotation that captivates viewers is not straightforward evidence of craft roll; it is consistent with a rotating glare tied to the pod’s optical/derotation behavior. Absent range and multi-sensor corroboration, Gimbal remains unresolved in the public record—but the rotation, specifically, has plausible sensor-artifact explanations.

Case C – FLIR / “FLIR1” (2004, Nimitz)

What the video shows

A small, cool-toned “tic-tac”-like shape in IR, tracked by the pod; the clip ends abruptly. This video is associated with the USS Nimitz carrier group’s November 2004 events. The weapon systems officer who filmed it, Chad Underwood, has discussed the capture publicly. The Pentagon formally released this clip in 2020; NAVAIR hosts it. New York Magazine U.S. Department of War

What we can (and can’t) infer from the clip alone

• No embedded range solution appears in the public clip, so size and speed cannot be derived from the video alone.
• The object’s appearance in mid-IR depends on sensor settings (polarity, gain, FOV) and atmospheric conditions.
• Parallax will again influence perceived motion because the observing aircraft is fast and maneuvering.

Official status

• The DOD/USN authenticate the video as genuine Navy pod imagery; they do not publish a formal analytic conclusion about the object in FLIR1.
• AARO’s historical report (2024) and ODNI documents do not endorse an exotic explanation for this clip; the broad message across official publications is that limited data constrain conclusions. U.S. Department of War

Takeaway: FLIR1’s provenance is solid (Navy), but the physics can’t be solved from the clip alone. Any firm claims about range, size, or g-loads are not derivable from what’s publicly available.

ODNI (DNI) context

• 2021 Preliminary Assessment: Catalogs UAP reporting challenges and stresses data shortfalls; notes some events appear to exhibit unusual characteristics but stops short of attribution. Director of National Intelligence
• 2022 & 2023 Annual Reports: Reporting volume increases; categories for attribution are broadened (natural, U.S. gov/industry, foreign gov/industry). The risk and threat definitions clarify the defense frame (air safety, force protection). Again, no endorsement of exotic origin. Director of National Intelligence

Why this matters here: The FLIR/Gimbal/GoFast clips sit within this policy picture—real videos, incomplete data, and safety/security framing. The DNI reports consistently urge better sensor data, standardization, and multi-sensor capture.

Deep dive: Parallax

AARO’s GoFast paper demonstrates a reproducible method: read the range and angles from the display; assume plausible aircraft headings; apply winds at the object’s altitude using historical reanalysis; solve for a solution family. They find:

• Object altitude ≈ 3,962 m (13,000 ft).
• Speeds vary with geometry, at times ≈ winds, at times up to ~40 m/s (≈ 90 mph) faster than the wind, none of which is extraordinary for a small object.
• The illusion of skimming the ocean is created by the jet’s motion; when you project the object’s arc to the surface, the apparent ground-track length explodes relative to the object’s modest true motion (classic parallax). AARO

This is the template investigators should use on any air-to-air UAP video: extract display data ➜ bound the kinematics ➜ check winds ➜ test parallax before invoking high performance.

What counts as an “official note” about these three?

• DoD release notice (2020): Confirms authenticity of FLIR, Gimbal, GoFast and provides rationale for declassification. U.S. Department of War
• NAVAIR FOIA hosting: Publishes the actual files (provenance). Naval Air Systems Command
• AARO information papers: Explain forced perspective/parallax; link to official imagery pages; provide GoFast resolution with methodology and numbers. AARO AARO 
• ODNI reports (DNI): Set the policy frame and define risk/threat, without case-level conclusions on these three videos. Director of National Intelligence 

Investigator’s cheat-sheet: reading the overlays

Common symbology cues in these clips (names can vary by software tape):

• Az / El: sensor pointing relative to aircraft.
• RNG (when present): pod-estimated slant range (crucial in GoFast).
• FOV/Zoom: narrow FOV magnifies parallax illusions.
• IR polarity: white-hot vs black-hot can change perceived shape.
• Track gates: show the algorithm’s lock box; a good lock doesn’t imply close range or high speed.

When RNG is missing (e.g., FLIR, Gimbal), you can’t solve size/speed without extra sensors. When RNG exists (GoFast), AARO demonstrates you can bound altitude and speed with modest assumptions. AARO

Implications (science, policy, and public understanding)

1. Science: Single-sensor, compressed weapon-system videos are insufficient for big claims. We need synchronized, multi-sensor capture (radar, EO/IR, pod metadata, GPS/INS) and open, anonymized data releases. This is consistent with ODNI and NASA’s calls for better data and standardized formats. Director of National Intelligence
2. Policy/National security: The Navy treats UAP as an air-safety and range-incursion issue, hence the formal UAP terminology and de-stigmatized reporting. The ODNI reports define risk and threat constructs; AARO’s public-facing technical notes aim to improve triage. TIME
3. Public understanding: The videos are real and interesting, but GoFast is now formally explained as parallax by AARO; Gimbal’s rotation is consistent with glare/derotation; FLIR1 remains undetermined from the clip alone. The evidence bar for extraordinary performance demands range, acceleration profiles, and corroboration that we don’t yet have in public. AARO

How to watch future UAP videos like an analyst

1. Grab the numbers: pause-step to capture RNG, Az, El, FOV, polarity, altitude, speed, bank, frame by frame if needed.
2. Ask “what’s the background?” Sea/terrain/clouds provide parallax baselines; uniform cloud decks can be deceptive.
3. Range first, then speed: if RNG is available (as in GoFast), compute altitude and bound speed; if not, withhold speed/size claims.
4. Artifact hunt: look for signs of glare, bloom, derotation, compression (blockiness), and tracking-box bias.
5. Cross-sensor: insist on radar, ES, GPS/INS, and weather/winds; without them, treat “extraordinary” reads as unproven.
6. Cite official repositories: prefer NAVAIR FOIA, AARO imagery, ODNI/DoD reports over social reuploads. Naval Air Systems Command

Bottom line

• GoFast: Now formally modeled by AARO as a parallax case; object at ~13,000 ft, speeds compatible with wind + small object; no anomalous performance evidenced. AARO
• Gimbal: The rotation in the video is consistent with a glare/derotation artifact; absent range/multi-sensor data, the case remains unresolved in public, but the rotation itself doesn’t imply craft roll. PetaPixel
• FLIR (Nimitz): Authentic Navy pod video; clip alone lacks range and multi-sensor corroboration necessary for kinematic claims. Unresolved in public data. U.S. Department of War

A data-first reading shows that sensor physics and geometry explain much of what “looks impossible” in these tapes. That doesn’t close the book on UAP, but it raises the bar for what future releases must include: range-resolvable data and multi-sensor context.

References 

• DoD Statement by the Department of Defense on the Release of Historical Navy Videos (Apr 27, 2020). U.S. Department of War
• NAVAIR FOIA Document library with FLIR, GIMBAL, GOFAST files. Naval Air Systems Command
• AARO Effect of Forced Perspective and Parallax View on UAP Observations (2024 information paper). AARO
• AARO GoFast Case Resolution Card & Methodology (2025): altitude ~13,000 ft; speed bounds; parallax. AARO
• ODNI Preliminary Assessment of UAP (Jun 25, 2021); 2022 Annual Report on UAP; FY2023 Consolidated Annual Report on UAP. Director of National Intelligence 
• AARO UAP Cases: Official Imagery (indexing FLIR/Gimbal/GoFast). AARO
• News context Navy confirmation of UAP videos’ authenticity (2019); press coverage of 2020 DoD release. TIME 

Claims Taxonomy

• Verified
  • Authenticity & provenance: FLIR, Gimbal, GoFast are genuine Navy pod videos; DoD released them in 2020; NAVAIR hosts the files. U.S. Department of War
  • GoFast kinematics: AARO (2025) resolves altitude (~13,000 ft) and shows apparent speed is motion parallax; no anomalous performance demonstrated. AARO
• Probable
  • Gimbal rotation = artifact: Rotation is probably a glare/derotation effect rather than physical roll, per multiple independent technical analyses; pending official case resolution. PetaPixel
• Disputed
  • FLIR1 “high performance” claims: Absent range and synchronized sensor data, claims of extreme acceleration or size remain disputed; the clip alone is insufficient. (DOD confirms video, not kinematics.) U.S. Department of War
• Legend
  • None (these are contemporary, documented Navy videos, not cultural narratives).
• Misidentification
  • GoFast speed illusion: The “skimming at insane velocity” reading is a parallax misinterpretation of a high-altitude, modest-speed object. AARO

Speculation labels 

• Hypothesis:
  If future Gimbal raw data and synchronized radar become public, the rotation will be shown to be a sensor/optics artifact, not object roll, consistent with glare + derotation behavior seen in other IR systems. (This is a testable claim awaiting data release.) PetaPixel
• Researcher Opinion:
  A standardized UAP “FMV+” package (pod video + sensor angles + airframe position/attitude + radar + winds) released even with lat/lon binning or redaction would allow independent teams to replicate AARO-style solutions and dramatically reduce controversy.
• Witness Interpretation:
  Aircrew watching a tiny hotspot race across a display while flying quickly will intuit “very fast object near the surface.” The human visual system evolved for stationary observers; in high-speed air-to-air geometry, intuition is often wrong, especially with parallax.

(Labels here denote interpretation vs. evidence; they are not statements of fact.)

SEO keywords

FLIR Gimbal GoFast explained, Navy UAP videos analysis, AARO GoFast parallax, Gimbal rotation glare derotation, FLIR1 Nimitz data, motion parallax UAP, ATFLIR artifacts, ODNI UAP annual report, AARO parallax paper, NAVAIR FOIA UAP videos, UAP sensor artifacts, UAP range estimation.