Releases / 7 / DOW-UAP-D175

BAASS Self-Assessment of UAP Analysis Capabilities, November 2010

File

DOW-UAP-D175

Type

Document, 141 pages

Agency

Department of War

Date

11/23/10

Place

Las Vegas, Nevada

Released

Release 7, October 23, 2026

Open the original on war.gov

The government's description

This document is an administrative, programmatic, or contractor-produced record related to the Advanced Aerospace Weapon System Applications Program (AAWSAP), a Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA)-administered program active from 2008 to 2012. AAWSAP’s official scope of work identified 12 technical research areas relating to potential aerospace threats over a time horizon of more than 40 years. As part of the broader program record, the file documents how AAWSAP was scoped, organized, tasked, funded, executed, or described at a particular point in time.

This November 2010 Bigelow Aerospace Advanced Space Studies (BAASS) contractor-authored capability statement presents BAASS’s analysis as technically rigorous and strategically valuable. The document appears intended not only to describe BAASS’s analytical capabilities but also to reinforce the case for the organization’s continued relevance and for the continuation of AAWSAP. The document summarizes the company’s self-assessment of the suitability of its personnel, software, equipment, field sensor, and data warehousing capabilities for analyzing unidentified aerial phenomena (UAP) and unidentified submerged objects (USOs). It includes excerpted case findings and uses selected case studies and modeling exercises as demonstrations of BAASS’s analytical capabilities. The report describes BAASS as combining field collection resources, historical databases, and computational tools such as ANSYS Multiphysics to model UAP incidents through engineering and physics analysis, including work on radar cross section, fluid behavior, acoustics, and aerodynamic performance. It also presents BAASS’s in-house capabilities as supporting both threat assessment and the study of advanced aerospace technologies, while asserting that analysis of UAP performance characteristics could inform future developments in propulsion, stealth, detection, and weapons systems.

Summary
Report on
BAASS UAP
Analysis
Capabilities

November 23, 2010

Summary
Report on
BAASSUAP
Analysis
Capabilities

November 23, 2010

TABLE OF CONTENTS
pg.
LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................................................ 4
LIST OF TABLES .......................................................................................................................... 9
1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................................................................................................... 10
2. INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................... 13
2. 1 HISTORICAL EVENTS AND STUDIES ....................................................................... 13
2.2 BAASS' TWELVE TECHNOLOGY FOCUS AREAS .................................................. 14
2.3 BAASS PERSONNEL, SOFTWARE, EQUIPMENT AND DATA
WAREHOUSE ................................................................................................................. 15
2.3.1
BAASS Personnel .................................................................................................... 15
2.3.2
ANSYS Multiphysics FEA ...................................................................................... 16
2.3.3
Equipment ................................................................................................................ 16
2.3.4
Data Warehouse ....................................................................................................... 19
3. TYPES OF UAPS OBSERVED .............................................................................................. 21
4 . ANALYTICAL AND NUMERICAL SOLUTIONS FOR UAP INVESTIGATIONS ........... 25
4.1 "TIC TAC" INCIDENT .................................................................................................... 25
4.1.1
Analytical Solutions of Velocities and Accelerations Associated with
"Tic Tac" Performance ............................................................................................ 32
4.1 .2
Summary of Analytical Velocity and Acceleration Solutions ................................. 32
4.1.3
Numerical Analysis of Compressible Flow ............................................................. 39
4.1.4
Summary and Conclusions of Compressible Numerical Analyses.......................... 46
4.1.5
Numerical Analysis of Incompressible Flow of a UAP Entering Water ................. 47
4.1.6
Numerical Analysis of Incompressible Flow of a UAP Entering Water
Results ...................................................................................................................... 48
4.1.7
Summary and Conclusions ofNumerical Analysis of Incompressible Flow
of a UAP Entering Water Results ............................................................................ 58
4.2 ANALYSES OF SPHERICAL UAPS .............................................................................. 58
4.2. 1
Acoustical Analysis of a Spherical USO ................................................................. 58
4.2.2
ANSYS Multiphysics Electromagnetic Capabilities ............................................... 82
4.2.3
Radar Cross Section Analysis of a Spherical UFO .................................................. 83
5. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION......................................................................................... 98
6. REFERENCES ....................................................................................................................... I 00
SYMBOLS AND ACRONYMS ................................................................................................ 102
ATTACHMENT 1-ANSYS INPUT FILES ............................................................................. 105
Summary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities
November 23, 2010
Page 2

USO ANSYS Multiphysics Acoustics Input File Example .................................................... 105
UAP ANSYS Multiphysics RCS Input Fi le Example ............................................................ 11 2
ATTACHMENT II - "TIC TAC" CFD CONTOUR PLOTS FOR PRESSURE,
TEMPERATURE AND MACH NUMBER............................................................................... 11 6
ATTACHMENT III - RIGHT CIRCULAR CYLINDER CFD CONTOUR PLOTS
FOR PRESSURE, TEMPERATURE AND MACH NUMBER ................................................ 128

Summary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities
November 23, 2010

Page 3

LIST OF FIGURES
pg.

Figure 1. The UFO Pattern: A Condensed Statement of Repeated Observations ........................ 21
Figure 2. Lockheed Martin Skunk Works SR-71 Black Bird ....................................................... 22
Figure 3. Lockheed F-117 Nighthawk Stealth Fighter ................................................................. 22
Figure 4. Northrop Grumman B-2 Spirit Stealth Bomber ............................................................ 23
Figure 5. Boeing Phantom Works B-2 Stealth X-45A UAV ........................................................ 23
Figure 6. Three Dimensional Rendering of a Cylindrical or "Tic Tac" UAP .............................. 24
Figure 7. Three Dimensional Rendering of a Metallic Spherical UAP ........................................ 24
Figure 8. Location of the AAV during the F/AI 8 Intercept ......................................................... 26
Figure 9. FLIR in 'White Hot' Mode ............................................................................................ 30
Figure 10. FLIR in "Black I-lot" mode .......................................................................................... 30
Figure 11. Tic Tac Parametric Velocities for Selected Times of Event Duration
in ft/sec ......................................................................................................................... 35
Figure 12. Tic Tac Parametric Velocities for Selected Times of Event Duration
in mph ......................................................................................................................... 36
Figure 13. Tic Tac Parametric Accelerations for Selected Times of Event Duration
in ft/sec2 ...................................................................................................................... 37
Figure 14. Tic Tac Parametric Accelerations for Selected Times of Event Duration
in g .............................................................................................................................. 38
Figure 15. Tic Tac Pressure at I/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 700 mph
with Mixed Inlet and Supersonic Outlet ..................................................................... 41
Figure 16. Tic Tac Temperature at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 700 mph
with Mixed Inlet and Supersonic Outlet ..................................................................... 41
Figure 17. Tic Tac Mach Number at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 700 mph
with Mixed Inlet and Supersonic Outlet.. ................................................................... 42
Figure 18. Tic Tac Pressure at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 1500 mph
with Supersonic Inlet and Supersonic Outlet.. ............................................................ 42
Figure 19. Tic Tac Temperature at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 1500 mph
with Supersonic Inlet and Supersonic Outlet .............................................................. 43
Figure 20. Tic Tac Mach Number at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 1500 mph
with Supersonic Inlet and Supersonic Outlet.. ............................................................ 43
Figure 21. Cylinder Temperature at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 700 mph
with Mixed lnlet and Supersonic Outlet ..................................................................... 44
Figure 22. Cylinder Mach Number at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 700 mph
with Mixed lnlet and Supersonic Outlet ..................................................................... 44
Figure 23. Cylinder Pressure at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 1500 mph
with Supersonic Inlet and Supersonic Outlet.. ............................................................ 45
Figure 24. Cylinder Temperature at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 1500 mph
with Supersonic lnlet and Supersonic Outlet.. ............................................................ 45
Figure 25. Cylinder Mach Number at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 1500 mph
with Supersonic Inlet and Supersonic Outlet.. ............................................................ 46
Figure 26. Solid Three Dimensional Geometry of Disc and Water. ............................................. 50
Figure 27. Solid Three Dimensional Geometry Mesh of Disc and Water .................................... 51
Figure 28. Solid Three Dimensional Geometry Mesh ofUAP Disc ............................................ 52
Summary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities
November 23, 2010

Page4

Figure 29. User Generated Cut Analysis Plane ............................................................................ 53
Figure 30. Animated Result, Fluid 2 Volume Fraction................................................................ 54
Figure 31. Total Pressure Around UAP ....................................................................................... 55
Figure 32. Water Surface Effects From Solid Impact.. ................................................................ 56
Figure 33. Water Surface Effects From Solid Impact (Side View).............................................. 57
Figure 34. Mesh Plot for 1,000 Hz with 25 Elements per Wavelength in Water......................... 61
Figure 35. Mesh Plot for 1,000 Hz with 50 Elements per Wavelength in Water......................... 62
Figure 36. Contour Plot of Real Component of Pressure (Pa) for t ,000 Hz
with 50 Elements per Wavelength in Water ............................................................... 63
Figure 37. Contour Plot of Real Component of Pressure (Pa) for 1,000 Hz
with 50 Elements per Wavelength in Water ............................................................... 64
Figure 38. Contour Plot of Imaginary Component of Pressure (Pa) for 1,000 Hz
with 25 Elements per Wavelength in Water ............................................................... 65
Figure 39. Contour Plot of the Magnitude of Pressure (Pa) for 1,000 Hz
with 25 Elements per Wavelength in Water ............................................................... 66
Figure 40. Steady State Real Component of Pressure (Pa) as a Function of Radial
Distance (m) Plot for 1,000 Hz with 25 Elements per Wavelength in Water. ............ 67
Figure 41 . Steady State Imaginary Component of Pressure (Pa) as a Function
of Radial Distance (m) Plot for 1,000 Hz with 25 Elements per Wavelength
in Water ....................................................................................................................... 68
Figure 42. Steady State Magnitude of Pressure (Pa) as a Function of Radial
Distance (m) Plot for 1,000 Hz with 25 Elements per Wavelength in Water. ............ 69
Figure 43. Contour Plot of Real Component of Pressure (Pa) for 5,000 Hz
with 25 Elements per Wavelength in Water ............................................................... 70
Figure 44. Contour Plot of Imaginary Component of Pressure (Pa) for 5,000 Hz
with 25 Elements per Wavelength in Water ............................................................... 71
Figure 45. Contour Plot of the Magnitude of Pressure (Pa) for 5,000 Hz
with 25 Elements per Wavelength in Water ............................................................... 72
Figure 46. Steady State Real Component of Pressure (Pa) as a Function
of Radial Distance (m) Plot for 5,000 Hz with 25 Elements per Wavelength
in Water....................................................................................................................... 73
Figure 47. Steady State Imaginary Component of Pressure (Pa) as a Function
of Radial Distance (m) Plot for 5,000 Hz with 25 Elements per Wavelength
in Water ....................................................................................................................... 74
Figure 48. Steady State Magnitude of Pressure (Pa) as a Function of Radial
Distance (m) Plot for 5,000 Hz with 25 Elements per Wavelength in Water. ............ 75
Figure 49. Contour Plo t of Real Component of Pressure (Pa) for 10,000 Hz
with 25 Elements per Wavelength in Water ............................................................... 76
Figure 50. Contour Plo t of Imaginary Component of Pressure (Pa) for 10,000 Hz
with 25 Elements per Wavelength in Water ............................................................... 77
Figure 51. Contour Plot of the Magnitude of Pressure (Pa) for I 0,000 Hz
with 25 Elements per Wavelength in Water ............................................................... 78
Figure 52. Steady State Real Component of Pressure (Pa) as a Function
of Radial Distance (m) Plot for 10,000 Hz with 25 Elements per Wavelength
in Water....................................................................................................................... 79
Summary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities
November 23, 2010

Page 5

Figure 53. Steady State Imaginary Component of Pressure (Pa) as a Function
of Radial Distance (m) Plot for 10,000 Hz with 25 Elements per Wavelength
in Water....................................................................................................................... 80
Figure 54. Steady State Magnitude of Pressure (Pa) as a Function of Radial Distance (m)
Plot for 10,000 Hz with 25 Elements per Wavelength in Water ................................ 81
Figure 55. Factors that Determine the Energy Returned by a Target... ........................................ 83
Figure 56. Effect of Distance from the radar to the Target on the· Power Density ....................... 84
Figure 57. Reduction in the Strength of Target Echoes with Range ............................................ 87
Figure 58. Geometry, Description and Maximum RCS .............................................................. 88
Figure 59. Radar Cross Section Comparison ............................................................................... 89
Figure 60. Mesh of½ Symmetry UFO Sphere with 25 Elements per Wavelength ..................... 90
Figure 61. Mesh of ½ Symmetry UFO Sphere with 50 Elements per Wavelength ..................... 91
Figure 62. Normalized radar Cross Section Plot for a ½ Symmetry IO m Metallic
Sphere with a 1 m Dielectric Coating in Decibels for 300 MHz and 25
Elements per Wavelength ........................................................................................... 93
Figure 63. Normalized radar Cross Section Plot for a½ Symmetry 10 m Metallic
Sphere with a 1 m Dielectric Coating in Decibels for 300 MHz and
50 Elements per Wavelength ...................................................................................... 95
Figure 64. Electric Filed Contour in V/m for a½ Symmetry 10 m Metallic Sphere
with a I m Dielectric Coating in Decibels for 300 MHz and 25 Elements
per Wavelength ........................................................................................................... 96
Figure 65. Tic Tac Pressure at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 100 mph
with Subsonic Inlet and Subsonic Outlet.. ................................................................ 116
Figure 66. Tic Tac Temperature at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 100 mph
with Subsonic Inlet and Subsonic Outlet .................................................................. 116
Figure 67. Tic Tac Mach Number at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 100 mph
with Subsonic Inlet and Subsonic Outlet.. ................................................................ 11 7
Figure 68. Tic Tac Pressure at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 200 mph
with Subsonic Inlet and Subsonic Outlet.. ................................................................ 117
Figure 69. Tic Tac Temperature at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 200 mph
with Subsonic Inlet and Subsonic Outlet .................................................................. 11 8
Figure 70. Tic Tac Mach Number at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 200 mph
with Subsonic Inlet and Subsonic Outlet.................................................................. 118
Figure 71. Tic Tac Pressure at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 300 mph
with Subsonic Inlet and Subsonic Outlet.. ................................................................ 119
Figure 72. Tic Tac Temperature at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 300 mph
with Subsonic Inlet and Subsonic Outlet .................................................................. 11 9
Figure 73. Tic Tac Mach Number at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 300 mph
with Subsonic Inlet and Subsonic Outlet.. ................................................................ 120
Figure 74. Tic Tac Pressure at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 400 mph
with Mixed Inlet and Subsonic Outlet ...................................................................... 120
Figure 75. Tic Tac Temperature at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 400 mph
with Mixed Inlet and Subsonic Outlet ...................................................................... 121
Figure 76. Tic Tac Mach Number at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 400 mph
with Mixed Inlet and Subsonic Outlet ...................................................................... 121

.
Summary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities
November 23, 2010

Page 6

Figure 77. Tic Tac Pressure at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 500 mph
with Mixed Inlet and Subsonic Outlet ...................................................................... 122
Figure 78. Tic Tac Temperature at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 500 mph
with Mixed Inlet and Subsonic Outlet ...................................................................... 122
Figure 79. Tic Tac Mach Number at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 500 mph
with Mixed Inlet and Subsonic Outlet ...................................................................... 123
Figure 80. Tic Tac Pressure at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 900 mph
with Supersonic Inlet and Supersonic Outlet.. .......................................................... 123
Figure 81 . Tic Tac Temperature at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 900 mph
with Supersonic Inlet and Supersonic Outlet ............................................................ 124
Figure 82. Tic Tac Mach Number at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 900 mph
with Supersonic Inlet and Supersonic Outlet ............................................................ 124
Figure 83. Tic Tac Pressure at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 1100 mph
with Supersonic Inlet and Supersonic Outlet.. .......................................................... 125
Figure 84. Tic Tac Temperature at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 1100 mph
with Supersonjc Inlet and Supersonic Outlet ............................................................ 125
Figure 85. Tic Tac Mach Number at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 1100 mph
with Supersonic Inlet and Supersonic Outlet.. .......................................................... 126
Figure 86. Tic Tac Pressure at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 1300 mph
with Supersonic Inlet and Supersonic Outlet.. .......................................................... 126
Figure 87. Tic Tac Temperature at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 1300 mph
with Supersonic Inlet and Supersonic Outlet.. .......................................................... 127
Figure 88. Tic Tac Mach Number at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 1300 mph
with Supersonic Inlet and Supersonic Outlet.. .......................................................... 127
Figure 89. Cylinder Pressure at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 100 mph
with Subsonic Inlet and Subsonic Outlet.. ................................................................ 128
Figure 90. Cylinder Temperature at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 100 mph
with Subsonic Inlet and Subsonic Outlet.. ................................................................ 128
Figure 91. Cylinder Mach Number at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 100 mph
with Subsonic Inlet and Subsonic Outlet.. ................................................................ 129
Figure 92. Cylinder Pressure at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 200 mph
with Subsonic Inlet and Subsonic Outlet.. ................................................................ 129
Figure 93. Cylinder Temperature at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 200 mph
with Subsonic Inlet and Subsonic Outlet.. ................................................................ 130
Figure 94. Cylinder Mach Number at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 200 mph
with Subsonic Inlet and Subsonic Outlet.. ................................................................ 130
Figure 95. Cyljnder Pressure at 1/6 Scale, Arr Temperature 223K and 300 mph
with Subsonic Inlet and Subsonic Outlet.. ................................................................ 131
Figure 96. Cylinder Temperature at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 300 mph
with Subsonic Inlet and Subsonic Outlet.. ................................................................ 131
Figure 97. Cylinder Mach Number at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 300 mph
with Subsonic Inlet and Subsonic Outlet.. ................................................................ 132
Figure 98. Cylinder Pressure at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 400 mph
with Subsonic Inlet and Subsonic Outlet.. ................................................................ 132
Figure 99. Cylinder Temperature at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 400 mph
with Subsonic Inlet and Subsonjc Outlet.. ................................................................ 133
Summary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities
November 23, 2010

Page 7

Figure 100. Cylinder Mach Number at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 400 mph
with Subsonic Inlet and Subsonic Outlet.. ............................................................. 133
Figure 101 . Cylinder Pressure at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 500 mph
with Mixed Inlet and Subsonic Outlet.. ................................................................. 134
Figure 102. Cylinder Temperature at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 500 mph
with Mixed Inlet and Subsonic Outlet ................................................................... 134
Figure 103. Cylinder Mach Number at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 500 mph
with Mixed Inlet and Subsonic Outlet ................................................................... 135
Figure 104. Cylinder Pressure at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 700 mph
with Mixed Inlet and Supersonic Outlet.. .............................................................. 135
Figure 105. Cylinder Pressure at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 900 mph
with Supersonic Inlet and Supersonic Outlet.. ....................................................... 136
Figure l 06. Cylinder Temperature at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 900 mph
with Supersonic Inlet and Supersonic Outlet.. ....................................................... 136
Figure 107. Cylinder Mach Number at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 900 mph
with Supersonic Inlet and Supersonic Outlet.. ....................................................... 137
Figure l 08. Cylinder Pressure at l/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 1100 mph
with Supersonic Inlet and Supersonic Outlet......................................................... 137
Figure 109. Cylinder Temperature at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 1100 mph
with Supersonic Inlet and Supersonic Outlet ......................................................... 138
Figure 110. Cylinder Mach Number at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 1100 mph
with Supersonic Inlet and Supersonic Outlet. ........................................................ 138
Figure 111. Cylinder Pressure at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 1300 mph
with Supersonic Inlet and Supersonic Outlet.. ....................................................... 139
Figure 112. Cylinder Temperature at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 1300 mph
with Supersonic Inlet and Supersonic Outlet.. ....................................................... 139
Figure 113. Cylinder Mach Number at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 1300 mph
with Supersonic Inlet and Supersonic Outlet.. ....................................................... 140

Summary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities
November 23,2010

Page 8

LIST OFTABLES
pg.

Table 1. Mach Regimes ................................................................................................................ 32
Table 2. Velocities and Accelerations ofTic Tac for Parametric Time Durations of Event.. ...... 34
Table 3. Properties of Water Used for ANSYS Hannonic Analyses ........................................... 60
Table 4. Normalized radar Cross Section for a 10 m Metallic Sphere with a 1 m
Dielectric Coating in Decibels for 300 MHz and 25 Elements per Wavelength ............ 92
Table 5. Normalized radar Cross Section for a 10 m Metallic Sphere withal m
Dielectric Coating in Decibels for 300 MHz and 50 Elements per Wavelength ............ 94

Summary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities
November 23, 2010

Page 9

1.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The purpose of this r,eport is to summarize the field data collection, in-house databases and
computational capabilities that currently reside at Bigelow Aerospace Advanced Space Studies
(BAASS) for the study of advanced aerospace technology. Between 2008 and 20 IO BAASS was
contracted by the Defense Warning Office of the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) to create,
staff, and equip a new organization in order to examine and analyze the threat to national
security associated with advanced aerospace technology. By selecting and modeling a few
sentinel cases of encounters with advanced aerospace technology, this report demonstrates the
in-house data collection, data storage and analysis resources built by BAASS under DIA
contract HHM402-08-C-0072.
Throughout the millennia individuals have observed and reported unexplained phenomena in the
sky. Some ofthese reports included bright and flashing lights, objects streaking across the sky or
silently hovering, and multiple colored and flashing structures morphing into one. Cylindrical,
cigar, spherical, lenticular, triangular and ellipsoid shaped structures have been reported hovering
and/or accelerating at rapid rates from a stationary position. Some of these abrupt, high speed
maneuvers have been harder to explain with conventional physics, considering the inherently
poor aerodynamic properties of many ofthese objects. It should be stressed many, but not all, of
these sightings may be explained by natural phenomena, or by unacknowledged aerospace
technology.
Several official government studies were conducted from the late 1940s until around 1970, but
many of these studies were superficial and lacking in rigor. Since 1970, because of an absence
of research funding, the study of Unidentified Aerial Phenomena (UAP) has been characterized
by cursory analysis and amateur, unscientific data collection.
Pilots, both civilian and military, have reported seeing unusual objects in the air, some of which
have been independently confirmed by radar. During the 1960s and 1970s a series of incidents
was reported along the so called Northern Tier of the United States where silent hovering objects
were observed over military facilities housing nuclear weapons. One report in March 1967
involving the simultaneous disabling of multiple missiles for a period of time, while a UAP
allegedly hovered nearby, stimulated considerable public interest when information of the event
began to emerge. The 1967 incident, if true, as well as other Northern Tier incidents, arguably
had national security implications.
Over the years, there have also been numerous reports of Unidentified Submerged Objects
(USO), in all bodies of water. Some USO and UAP reportedly exhibited superior performance
capabilities in velocity and acceleration underwater in the absence of detectable turbulence or
cavitation signatures. While comparing our state of the art military equipment with these
capabilities a reasonable individual may conclude there are national security implications.
Bigelow Aerospace Advanced Space Studies, LLC (BAASS) is a research organization focused
on the identification, evaluation, and acquisition of novel and emerging future technologies
worldwide as they specifically relate to air and space craft. Cutting edge research areas include
propulsion systems, space applications of nanosensors, piezoelectric and nanowire fabrics,
human performance, plasma stealth technologies, and directed high energy weapons. BAASS
Summary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities
November 23, 2010

Page 10

was contracted to the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) in 2008 to investigate and analyze the
possibility of a credible threat posed by UAPs. To accomplish this mission, BAASS over the
past two years has focused on developing three separate resources, each unique to the study of
UAP: 1) to obtain the most comprehensive suite of portable field sensors and personnel
available, 2) to build the most all-inclusive database of UAP performance capabilities and
behavior in the world and 3) to acquire world class computational methodology for analysis of
UAP data. This report touches on all aspects of these resources, but concentrates on the in-house
computational capabilities.
BAASS acquired the ANSYS Multiphysics Finite Element Analysis (FEA) program, for "a first
of a kind" engineering and physics in-house resource devoted to providing a scientifically sound
mathematical analysis and modeling of UAP behavior. Thus BAASS has acquired significant
computational capability to convert field data into mathematical models and three dimensional
simulations.
This report provides theory, analytical and numerical solutions for selected UAP and USO
incidents through engineering and physics analyses. In particular, we examine a sentinel
incident - the "Tic Tac" event - where Fl A-18 aircraft from a United States Carrier Strike Group
were vectored to a nearby unidentified contact in November 2004. The white object observed by
four F/A-18F aircrew was described as 40 feet in length and shaped and colored like a "Tic Tac"
candy.
Many analyses of UAP may use analytical or closed form solutions to solve the equations that
describe the physics of an event. Where analytical solutions do not exist or the geometry is too
complex, ANSYS multiphysics provides a powerful computational platform to solve large
problems numerically, while combining and solving many different physical equations.
Compressible fluid flow analyses were performed to visualize the steady state pressure,
temperature and Mach number contours around two craft shapes. An incompressible fluid flow
problem around a solid disc shaped object descending through the air into a body of liquid was
investigated to observe the disturbance produced on the surface of the water. A successful
analysis of a USO was conducted using a full harmonic acoustics simulation; and computed
values showed good agreement with the expected theoretical solutions. An analysis of a
spherical UAP radar cross section (RCS) was conducted using a full harmonic electromagnetic
simulation. Various other shapes of UAP and USOs may be evaluated by applying boundary
conditions and transient physics equations to obtain a better understanding of the capabilities of
these objects.
BAASS employees and contractors comprise scientists, engineers, analysts, intelligence and
investigative professionals with a wide range of technical capabilities and backgrounds. Many of
the professional staff members are considered national and international experts in their
respective fields. BAASS' personnel have experience in performing work for government
agencies such as the Department of Energy and Department of Defense. A broad mandate to
research and develop future technology platforms pertaining to advanced propulsion, advanced
non- aerodynamic lift capabilities, future material science breakthroughs including
nanofabrication, novel power generation and signature reduction technologies, human interaction
and effects of advanced technologies including field and radiation biological effects exists in
Summary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities
November 23, 20 I 0

Page 11

BAASS' work scope. BAASS' vision is to identify and acquire disruptive or discontinuous
technologies that will fonn the basis of aerospace and defense applications through the year
2050, as well as those that pose potential threats to national security.
The company goal is to become a major entity in the research and development of future
aerospace propulsion systems, controls, detection and tracking systems, stealth and directed
energy uses by employing the best and brightest engineers and scientists available. The previous
mentioned capabilities place BAASS in a strong position to provide technical results in both
classified and unclassified endeavors.

Summary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities
November 23, 2010

Page 12

2. INTRODUCTION
2.1

lliSTORICAL EVENTS AND STUDIES

Disc, triangle, cigar and bell- shaped flying objects have been reported and documented on a
global basis for millennia. The sighting by l1843(a)(2)
Ion June 24, 1947 in the state of
Washington garnered unprecedented global media attention and began the modern UFO era.
While flying near Mt. Rainier, he observed a chain of nine unusual objects flying from north to
1843(a)(2) __sou.th.!
!reported that "two or three of them would dip or change course slightly, just
1

1843(a)(2)

;~:~~;~~~~:~~;.~:~~~:v~r~::~~ l~~le l~or:~~~~~~:~!~t~~t:d~~ ~I~~~-~ s~~i::~7,~~~
described them at the time their flight was like speed boats on rough water or similar to the tail
of a Chinese kite that l once saw blowing in the wind. As l put it to newsmen in Pendleton,
Oregon, they flew like a saucer would if you skipped it across the water." 1843(a)(2)
Thus
the moniker "flying saucer" was born. The terms "flying saucer" and " ·
used
commonly and interchangeably in the media to describe what are now known as UFOs
(Unidentified Flying Object). Many sightings of UFOs were reported by commercial and
mi litary pilots during the late 1940s and a flying saucer allegedly crashed outside of Roswell,
New Mexico, in early July 1947.

Shortly thereafter, a series of sightings of "green fireballs" began. These reports were almost
exclusively over the state of New Mexico. Increasing significantly in number by December
1948, these sightings typically occurred over sensitive government installations, most notably the
~~~~:.,;i..l,lol.ll,l,...lol.lil£/.dia National Laboratories. An investigation was initiated by meteor expert
After personally witnessing a green fireba ll four to five degrees above the
- on
- zo-n- on_ a__o_n__z.....
ontal trajectory on December 12, 19481
!concluded the fireballs were 1~~~(~)(2)
structured, that is, not atmospheric phenomena. InitiaHy they were thought to be of Russian
origin. In April 1950, Project Twinkle was created to be a network of stations with the purpose
of observing, studying, and collecting data on the fireball phenomena. This project did little to
solve the mystery, and was disbanded later that year. Large numbers of UFO sightings
continued in the late 1940s and as a result, some unease about the nature of the objects began to
escalate in military circles, notably in the Air Force. For example, in September 1947, Air Force
l1843(a)(2)
lissued a memorandum stating 'The reported operating characteristics
such as extreme rates of climb, maneuverability (particularly in roU), and motion which must be
considered evasive when sighted or contacted by friendly aircraft and radar, lend belief to the
y some of the objects are controlled either manually, automatically or remotely. 11
1843(a)(?L
recommended a detailed study of the UFO phenomenon. Based on increasing concern
o
p rt of the military, the U.S. government initiated official studies of UFOs.
Project Sign was the first official U.S. government study of UFOs performed by the United
States Air Force in early 1948 and concluded in early 1949. Project Sign officials argued UFOs
were likely of extraterrestrial origin, and most of the project's personnel came to favor the
extraterrestrial hypothesis. This hypothesis was rejected by the senior Air Force personnel.
Project Sign eventually came to no oflicial conclusion about UFOs with the final report staling
the existence of flying saucers could neither be confirmed nor denied. Project Sign was
concluded and restarted as Project Grudge in February 1949.
Summary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabi lities
November 23, 20 10

Page 13

Project Grudge attempted to give each and every case a solution or an identifier tag. Grudge
existed in various form and name until project completion in March 1952. The final Project
Grudge report stated 22% of cases were categorized as unidentified, 69% identified, and 9%
contained insufficient infonnation to categorize.
In March 1952 Project Blue Book replaced Grudge and remained headquartered at the Air
Technical Intelligence Center at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base in Ohio. Over the next
seventeen years, Project Blue Book recorded approximately 15,000 UFO incidents, and Blue
Book reported 701 of these incidents as "unidentifie "
•
• •
• •
in
1952 prompted the CIA to convene a scientific panel, 1843(a)(2 )
m
January 1953 to examine recent UFO data. It is wt e y state among mo
·O
organizations that the I1843(a)(2)
advocated a campaign to "debunk" UFOs.

I

Beginning on November l, 1966, the Air Force Office of Scientific Research awarded $313 000
to a research team at the University of Colorado 1843(a)(2)
> - - - - -...........---....... . - - -..........--....-"'"
study the scientific implications of UFOs. The stu y was un erta en on t e matena mis e y
Project Blue Book. The 1843(a)(2)
final (and controversial) conclusion stated "we
have recommended agams
e moun mg o a ma·or effort for continuing UFO study for
scientific reasons." 1843(a)(2)
announced Blue Book
would be closed due to the fact further funding "cannot be justified either on the grounds of
national security or in the interest of science." The last publicly taken report for project Blue
Book operations was December 17, 1969, but officially it closed on January 30, 1970.
Since the end of Blue Book numerous organizations have taken on the role of UFO/UAP
investigations. Few of these groups have been professionally organized, trained, or equipped to
properly investigate the phenomena. In contrast, one purpose of this report is to show BAASS is
on the route to being the leading force in complete investigation and scientific analysis of the
phenomena.

2.2

BAASS' TWELVE TECHNOLOGY FOCUS AREAS

BAASS is a research organization focused on the identification, evaluation, and acquisition of
novel and emerging future technologies worldwide as they specifically relate to air and space
craft. Cutting edge research areas include propulsion systems, space applications of nanosensors,
piezoelectric and nanowire fabrics, human perfonnance, plasma stealth technologies, and
directed high energy technologies.
Research and development necessary for the procurement of the technology required for
advanced space and weapons systems is conducted through use of computational Multiphysics
FEA programs, development of computer code, experimentation, material science testing and
manufacturing of prototypes in BAASS/Bigelow Aerospace in-house and in collaborating
facilities and laboratories. Research areas of interest include Computational Fluid Dynamics,
Heat Transfer, Nuclear Engineering, Electromagnetics and Radio Frequencies, Theoretical and
Computational Physics, Biological Sciences and Chemistry.

Summary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities
November 23, 2010

Page 14

Research performed through theoretical and computational applications, as well as modeling of
components of non-conventional propulsion systems is under way to provide for future
development of vehicles capable of operating in the atmosphere, under water and in space.
BAASS research intends to provide innovative approaches and concepts for aircraft, propulsion,
and flight technologies demonstrating significant advances in performance and capabilities
beyond those in operation today.
BAASS' twelve key technology areas concentrate on how breakthrough technologies will
provide for the development of advanced spacecraft concepts and weapon technologies through
the year 2050 and beyond. The twelve areas are:
l. Lift
2. Propulsion
3. Control
4. Power Generation
5. Spatial Temporal Translation
6. Materials
7. Configuration, Structure
8. Signature Reduction
9. Human Interface
I0. Human Effects
11. Armament
12. Other Peripheral Areas

2.3

BAASS PERSONNEL, SOFTWARE, EQUIPMENT AND DATA WAREHOUSE

Although the majority of this report is devoted to demonstrating BAASS' capabilities in
mathematical modeling of various UAP performance parameters, the next section provides a
short summary of some of the BAASS personnel, portable data collection sensors, as well as the
current BAASS in-house database architecture.

2.3.1 BAASS Personnel
BAASS employees and contractors comprise scientists, engineers, analysts, intelligence and
investigative professionals from diverse backgrounds. A majority of BAASS personnel have
performed work for government agencies such as the Department of Energy and Department of
Defense.
Research and development necessary for the procurement of the technology required for
advanced space and weapons systems is conducted by numerical computational analysts through
use of computational multiphysics FEA programs. Application and scientific programmers are
involved in development of computer code that drives data mining and scientific applications
used to evaluate historical and present UAP cases. Professionals in all areas conduct
experimentation, material science testing and manufacturing of prototypes in both in-house
facilities and collaborating facilities and laboratories. Areas of concentration include
Summary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities
November 23, 2010

Page 15

Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFO), Heat Transfer, Nuclear Engineering, Electromagnetics
and Radio Frequencies (RF), Theoretical and Computational Physics, Biological Sciences and
Chemistry.
2.3.2 ANSYS Multiphysics FEA
The ANSYS Workbench platform is a powerful multi-domain simulation environment that
harnesses the core physics from ANSYS, enables their interoperability, and provides common
tools for interfacing with CAD, repairing geometry, creating meshes and post-processing results.
To our knowledge, this powerful computational capability has not been previously utilized in the
64 year history of UFO study. It is hypothesized that through this more broad ranging analysis,
additional theoretical constructs can be generated regarding UAP and USO behavior. These in
tum can provide the scaffolding for advanced engineering concepts.
2.3.3
Equipment
2.3.3.1
Field Investigative Equipment
BAASS has amassed a considerable amount of field investigative equipment. The inventory
includes a variety of iimaging devices, along with Global Positioning Systems (OPS) and range
finding items. Of note are the following:
2.3.3.1.1
Canon 50 MK II Digital SLR Cameras
Two Canon 5D MK 11, 21.1 Megapixel, Digital SLR cameras were selected based on their
capability for low light photography when combined with the Canon EF 300 mm ultrasonic, and
the Canon EF 24-105 mm ultrasonic lenses. The 21. 1 Megapixel size allows for RAW images
suitable for scientific examination and analysis.
2.3.3.1.2
Sony A350 Digital SLR camera
The Sony A350 is a 14.2 Megapixel, digital SLR camera, with a Sony N 50-300 mm, a
Sony N 50-70 mm lens, and a Sony Macro 2.8/50 mm lens. The a350 while a high quality
camera, is compact and portable. It also allows for close-up and one-to-one photography.
2.3.3.1.3 Sony High Definition Video Cameras
Three Sony High Definition Video (HOV) 1080i, High Definition Video cameras, with low light
capability were chosen for video capture in various field conditions.
2.3.3.1.4
Sony Handicam, Digital Video Cameras
Four Sony Handicam, digital video cameras with 80 GB hard drive storage capacity. These
cameras are compact and portable, and using the HOD allow for up to 4 hours of continuous
video recording with no tapes or other external media. They can also capture still images.
Summary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities
November 23, 2010
Page 16

2.3.3.1.5 ATT PVS-7, Night Vision Devices
Seven ATT PVS-7, Nmght Vision Devices - military quality, state-of-the-art night vision devices.

2.3.3.1.6 Oasys Universal Thermal Monocular (UTM)
This device is a ruggedizcd thermal imaging and designation system. It includes a digital
magnetic, both still and video capture capability as well as a digital PC interface allowing for
real-time review of images in the field.

2.3.3.1.7

Garmin Global Positioning Systems

One Colorado 400t and two Oregon 400t, Global Positioning Systems, allowing fo r route
mapping as well as waypoint storage in the field.

2.3.3.1.8

Leica Rangemaster 1200 Laser Range Finders

These two range finders are accurate out to 1500 meters, extremely compact and user friendly.

2.3.3.1.9

Sony CyberShot Cameras

Three Sony CyberShot I 0.1 megapixel digital cameras - compact and portable for quick reaction
to opportunities while actively investigating.
These equipment items give BAASS considerable capability when investigating events in the
field. In addition to the items listed above a wide range of other support type items are in the
BAASS inventory. T hese include Toshiba laptop computers, digital voice recorders, digital
Game Cameras, TR spot lights, power invertors, several pieces of older night vision equipment,
and packaging and storage items for solid, liquids, and hazardous materials.
In addition, BAASS obtained Technical Surveillance Countermeasures (T SCM) equipment in an
effort to enhance the security of BAASS facilities. ln addition to the below listed TSCM
equipment BAASS personnel are trained by Research Electronics International in Cookeville,
TN; also the manufacturer of the equipment.
•
•
•
•

OSCOR 5000E, Omni-Spectral Correlator covering the radio frequency range from
50 kHz to 3 GHz
ORION Non-Linear Junction Detector
TA LAN Telephone Analyzer
CPM-700 Broadband Detector

Summary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities
November 23, 20 10

Page 17

2.3.3.2
2.3.3.2.1

Scientific Equipment
Veho VMS-001 200X 1.3 Megapixel Digital USB Microscope

This instrument is a very portable (4.4 x 1.3 inches) digital microscope which expands the
capability of the field! investigators. The microscope allows detailed images to be taken and
connects directly to a laptop. Illumination is via 4 built in white LED lights.
2.3.3.2.2 Celestron 44340 3.5" LCD Digital Microscope

This instrument is a bench top digital microscope. The microscope has magnification
capabilities of 40-400,X extending up to 1600X with digital zoom. Images can be uploaded to a
PC or laptop via a USB connection. It could also be taken into the field if required.
2.3.3.2.3 Niton XL3t 900S GOLDD Analyzer

This instrument is an X-ray fluorescence (XRF) analyzer. The device analyzes the emission of
characteristic "secondary" (or fluorescent) X-rays from a material that has been excited by
bombarding with high-energy X-rays. BAASS field teams deploy the Niton and conduct on-site
elemental analysis.
2.3.3.2.4 Colibri TTC Handhcld Dose Rate Meter

This instrument package allows for the detection and quantification of alpha, beta and gamma
radiation in the field. The ability to accurately measure and quantify these three types of
radiation adds another critical level of capability to the BAASS arsenal ofanalysis.
2.3.3.2.5 Hand held Spectrum Analyzer Pro Bundle 3 (NF-5030 and HF-60100)

These are instruments designed to detect and measure a broad spectrum of electromagnetic
(EMF) radiation and high frequency radio waves. The NF-5030 measures three dimensional
magnetic fields from as low as background up to 20 Gauss. Combining the two instruments
electric fields are measured from 0.1 V/m to 20 kV/m and frequencies from 1 Ilz to 9.4 Gllz.

Summary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities
November 23, 2010

Page 18

2.3.3.6 Hardware for ANSYS Workbench Platform
The research and work performed by BAASS ranges from technical design and prototyping, all
the way up to advanced theoretical and computational studies of partial differential equations
describing multiphysics problems. An expandable twelve core Hewlett Packard server with
48 GB of RAM and I TB of storage is used to perform parallel processing solutions for
structural, fluid flow, heat transfer, high and low frequency electromagnetic problems along with
coupled physics of two or more of those listed previously.

2.3.4

Data Warehouse

BAASS developed a Data Warehouse to support research on UAP and related anomalies and
titled it "Project CAP ELLA". The BAASS Data Warehouse is revolutionary because it: 1)
AAP Person incorporates a format ~a~_c!_on _the ~ JSix Layer Model for analyzing UAP, 2)
~· MP •·· includes several new databases developed by BAA S, and 3) incl.udes databases developed by
58
erson
others which have never been collectively analyzed. The Data Warehouse currently consists of
eleven separate databases and their associated supporting documentation in electronic format
such as witness interviews, photographs, videos, recordings, sketches, analytical reports, etc.
Each of the databases contains UAP sighting events relating lo the purpose of that particular
database, although some of the reported cases do overlap. Four of the databases will continue to
catalogue current and future sighting reports. Seven of the databases have been completed and
full y integrated and populated with all pertinent info rmation captured by the CAPELLA format.
BAASS will continue to input historical data in the CAPELLA format and will expand the Data
Warehouse with additional databases and unusual aerial phenomena information.
The eleven databases c urrently included in the Data Warehouse are:
I . N IOS Database

2. l 1843(a)(2)

!Pilot Database

3. Sign/Grudge/Dlue Book Database
4. UFOCAT Database

5. M UFON Case Management System Database
6. Project Colares Database
7. Canadian Release Database
8. United Kingdom Release Database
9. BAASS Database
10. Utah Ranch Database
11 . Post-Utah Ranch EITects Database

Summary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities
November 23, 20 I 0

Page 19

The BAASS Data Warehouse is an electronic repository for historical, ongoing, and future UAP
reporting and investigations. The Data Warehouse is designed to faci litate sophisticated analyses
and data mining to improve our understanding of the extent, structure, and frequency of UAP, as
well as their potential correlation to known physical, environmental, biological, or socio-political
factors.
AAP Person
5, AAP

2.3.4.1 CAPELLA Format

The CAPELLA database format is based upon the "Six Layer Model for Ano alous Person 58
0 n,...
Phenomena" developed by !AAP Person 5
Iand .,..fA....,...P_P_e_rs_...,
s..,.
a.....1i.....-.................................·~
_ ...
--·_---_.. ....................1
This six layer model encapsulates all of the potential characteristics o UAP events that can e
studied. The six layers are:
1

1. The Physical Layer - those physical characteristics associated with a UAP event

2. The Anti-Physical Layer - the patterns that conflict with those predicted in modem physics
3. The Psychological Layer - the psychological impacts to the witness(es) and the social
conditions that surround them
4. The Physiological Layer - the effects perceived by humans
5. The Psychic Layer - the effects commonly found in parapsychology literature
6. The Cultural Layer - the primary and secondary effects upon society.
Additionally, the CAPELLA format captures administrative details associated with the UAP
event, such as witness information, location, date, time, duration, etc.

2.3.4.2 Data Warehouse Upgrade
BAASS is undergoing a database upgrade project to further enhance data security and integrity,
and increase processing power for greater analytical capability. The CAPELLA framework and
methodologies will be preserved in the upgraded system. This upgrade w ill increase efficiency
and effectiveness, and will allow databases to be analyzed individually or collectively.

2.3.4.3 Statistical Analysis
BAASS h u~OJ21$.1S::a....LimL:.1S:~ l, yet comprehensive statistical analyses for three of the
databases: !i:-"TT':=c:-T~=~- - ,r,:1 Pilot Database, Pro·ect Si n/Grudge/Blue Book Database,
and the U
anc
a ase.
e analyses on th 1843(a)(2) and Blue Book databases are
focused on identifying patterns of technical information om e case reports. The Utah Ranch
analysis delves into patterns and aspects of when anomalous activity is reported in an attempt to
identify potential times and improve the means of future detection methods.

Summary Report on BA.ASS UAP Analysis Capabilities
November 23,2010

Page 20

3.
TYPES OF UAPS OBSERVED
I
NASA aeronautical engineed 1843(a)(2)
made important inroads into attempts to delineate
some quantitative characteristics of UFO perfonnance by close examination of, and derivation of
numerical parame
• . ligated sentinel UFO casesP843(a)(2)
ln addition,
computer scientist AAP Person 5
has attem ted to compute estimates of optical power
This report attempts to extend and broaden
output derived from
reports AAP Person 5
these preliminary studies using considerably enhanced computational power and mathematical
modeling capabilities.
I
Figure 1, taken froml1843(a)(2)
UAP phenomena.
!depicts illustrations of the various shapes associated with the
THE UFO PATTERN
A Cond«!Mcl Statement of Repeated Obsemltions
CONAGUUJIOMOF HIGNLY ll9(Al1NG SHAPES
.IAUC'.M
~
l>offltclS-..
'"'°'''ommonl
•
,~
u,,lkulo, S.UCt<
OIOill<
..
OOU..HAT
,
"'E:3
, , . ."
•
C'OMCMHA1(,,..,
:A-
MTUM
0 ~,
0
.........
•
•
IU#'SOINl,..,o,#oofWJ'
,
o
(:):
NOrf:(IJSll#w,-b.,,_r,p;a,lnlg#lllinwoitglow.(1} Dml>-dal-"<:olanlMineltra««OJtlsol.,,,-,y,(3}Glonldi,ors /tow,,._ol,o.
Figure 1. The UFO Pattern: A Condensed Statement of Repeated Observations
As an important component of these studies, BAASS understands a considerable number,
possibly a majority, of UAP reports can be explained by simple misidentification of current
advanced technology platforms. Some recent black triangle and even possibly some saucer and
hat shaped UAP reports over the last several decades may have been explained by aircraft
sightings of the Lockheed SR-71 Blackbird (Figure 2), Lockheed F-117 Nighthawk Stealth
Fighter (Figure 3), Northrop Grumman B-2 Spirit Stealth Bomber (Figure 4) and Boeing
Phantom Works Stealth X-45A Unmanned Arial Vehicles (UAV) (Figure 5). Nevertheless, a
significant number of cylindrical and cigar shapes along with spherical, lenticular and ellipsoid
Summary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities
November 23, 2010
Page 21

shaped UAPs which appear to hover and/or accelerate at rapid rates from a stationary position
have been harder to explain considering the inherently poor aerodynamic properties of these
objects. It is this latter subset of UAP reports that BAASS has focused on.
Figure 2. Lockheed Martin Skunk Works SR-71 Black Bird
Figure 3. Lockheed F-117 Nighthawk Stealth Fighter
Summary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities
November 23. 2010
Page 22

Figure 4. Northrop Grumman B-2 Spirit Stealth Bomber
Figure 5. Boeing Phantom Works B-2 Stealth X-45A UAV
Summary Report on B/\ASS IJAP Analysis Capubilitic:s
November 23. 20 10
Pugc 21

Figure 6. Three Dimensional Rendering of a Cylindrical or "Tic Tac" UAP
Figure 7. Three Dimensional Rendering of a Metallic Spherical UAP
Summary Report on BA ASS UAP Analysi'> <'arabilities
November 23, 20 I 0
Page 24

4.
4.1

ANALYTICAL AND NUMERICAL SOLUTIONS FOR UAP INVESTIGATIONS
"TIC TAC" INCIDENT

The following summary is excerpted from the report of an investigation conducted by personnel
assigned to DIA of an observation by elements of the Nimitz Carrier Strike Group of UAP off
the coast of Mexico in November 2004. Note: The DIA personnel who wrote the report utilized
the term Anomalous Aerial Vehicle (AAV) rather than the more common Unidentified Aerial
Phenomenon (UAP) or Unidentified Flying Object (UFO). All three terms, AAV, UAP, and
UFO are used at different times in this section and should be considered interchangeable.
During the period of approximately I 0-16 November 2004, the Nimitz Carrier Strike Group
(CSG) was operating off the western coast of the United States in preparation for their
deployment to the Arabian Sea. The USS Princeton on several occasions detected multiple
Anomalous Aerial Vehicles (AAVs) operating in and around the vicinity of the CSG. The AAVs
would descend "very rapidly" from approximately 60,000 feet down to approximately 50 feet in
a matter of seconds. They would then hover or stay stationary on the radar for a short time and
depart at high velocities and tum rates. On 14 November after again detecting the AAV, the
USS Princeton took the opportunity of having a flight of two FlA-18Fs returning from a training
mission to further investigate the AAV. The USS Princeton took over control of the F/A-l 8s
from the E-2C Airborne Early Warning aircraft and vectored in the f/A- l 8s for intercept leading
to visual contact approximately one mile away from the AAV, which was reported to be "an
elongated egg or a 'Tic Tac' shape with a discernable midline horizontal axis." It was "solid
white, smooth, with no edges. It was "uniformly colored with no nacelles, pylons, or wings." It
was approximately 46 feet in length. The F/A-18Fs radar could not obtain a ' lock' on the AAV;
however it could be tracked while stationary and at slower speeds with the Forward Looking
Infrared (FLI R). The AAV did take evasive actions upon intercept by the F/A-18 demonstrating
an advanced acceleration (g), aerodynamic, and propulsion capability. The AAV did not take
any offensive action against the CSG; however, given its ability to operate unchallenged in close
vicinity to the CSG it demonstrated the potential to conduct undetected reconnaissance leaving
the CSG with a limited ability to detect, track, and/or engage the/\/\V.

l

I

According to 1843(a)(2)
the AAVs would descend from a very high altitude into the
scan volume of the AN/SPY- 1 at a hi gh velocity. The top of the scan volume would put the
AAVs at higher than 60,000 feet. The AAVs would descend "very rapidly" from approximately
60,000 feet down to approximately 50 feet in a matter of seconds. They would then hover for a
short time and depart at high velocities and at tum rates demonstrating an advanced acceleration
(g) capability. p843(a)(2)
7 added that based on his experience, which is 17 years as a Fire
Control on Aegis cruisers, Che AA V exhibited ballistic missile Characteristics in reference to its
appearance, velocity, and indications on the radar. Since the radar was in the mode to handle /\ir
Intercept of conventional aircraft it never obtained an accurate track of the AAVs and was
quickly "dropped" by the radar meaning it was eliminated by the computer to reduce the amount
ofclutter on the radar, as any other false target is handled. If the radar were set up in a mode for
Ballistic Missile tracking they likely would have had the capability to track the AAV. They were
detected three separate times during the week operating off the western coast of the United States
and Mexico. The Tactical Air Officer onboard the Princeton could not identify the radar contact
Summary Report on B/\ASS UAP Analysis Capabilities
November 23, 2010

Page 25

and given the high speed and altitude was perplexed. On 14 November 2004, after again
detecting an AA V took the opportunity of two F/A-18s airborne in the vicinity to task them for
airborne reconnaissance of the AA V.

Figure 8. Location of the AAV during the F/A18 Intercept
!AAP Person 9

b was flying a single seat

F/A-18C that launched from the USS Nimitz at approximately 1030L to conduct a Functional
Check Flight of an aircraft that had recently completed significant maintenance. He noted the
weather that day was blue skies. no clouds, and unlimited visibility. After 30 minutes into hi s
fl ight he received a radio call from his air controller asking him to investigate an unidentified
airborne contact. This was not a standard request. Additionally the controller asked if he had
ordnance onboard, which was odd since no controller had ever asked that question during a
SummaJ)' Report on BA.A~S LAP Analysis Capabi lities
November 23. 2010

Page 26

situation of identifying an unknown contact over U.S. or International territory. He responded
that he had no ordnance onboard. The controller provided vectors to the vicinity of Figure 8.
The object was reported to be at "slow speed and low altitude."
While en route at approximately 250 knots indicated/400 knots groundspeed at mediwn altitude
(15-25,000 feet), he gai ned radar contact of what he believed to be two F/A- 18Fs that were
approaching the AAV from the west at low altitude (500- 5,000 feet). There was no other traffic
on the radar. The controller informed him to remain above I 0,000 feet, as there was other fighter
traffic at low altitude investigating the AAV. As he approached approximately 15nm from the
AAV descending through approximately 15,000 feet, he could see a water disturbance in the
ocean surface. He recalled that the sea state was low (calm). At approx imately 5-10 nm away
from the AAV, the controller told him to "skip it'' and return to his operating area. Since he was
close he elected to fly over the water disturbance to try and see what was causing it.
The disturbance appeared to be 50 to I 00 meters in diameter and close to round. It was the only
area and type ofwhitewater activity that could be seen and reminded him of images of something
rapidly submerging from the surface like a submarine or ship sinking. It also looked like a
possible area of shoal water where the swell was breaking over a barely submerged reef or
island. He overflew the disturbance and turned back to the northwest. As he was flying away he
could see the disturbance clearing and could no longer identify the place where it occurred. He
did not see any object or vessel associated with the disturbance either above the surface, on the
surface, or below the surface. He also never made visual contact with the other fighter aircraft
that were vectored to the location or the AAV. It is possible that the disturbance was being
caused by an AAV but that the AAV was ' cloaked' or invisible to the human eye.
!MP Person 9 !recovered aboard the Nimitz at approximately 1200L. H~~........,.......,....,..........,'"'14'

Intelligence Center (CVIC) and was asked by hi
•
Officer
saw the "supersonic Tic Tac"? We questioned now-:,-----;-,---r- o dete ~:--:T~-c-::-::i-=::-:-:,~....
information but based on his position in CVIC a
was not involved in any further
discussions concerning the AAV.
1843(a)(2)

He and
1843(a)(2)
ere in the lead aircraft of the first F/A-18F section airborne
a ay om
- , 1843(a)(2)
The flight walked, started and launched with no
issue. They completed their departure from the USS Nimitz and flew to the working area to
conduct the training portion of the flight. After they completed their training the E-2C controller
handed them off to the USS Princeton !1843(a)(2)
f1here they received vectors via Bearing
Range Altitude Aspect (BRAA) to an unknown contact flyin into the w~king ar a from the
1843(a)(2) . south. -1··--· !asked what ordnance they had on board. 1843(a)(2)
tol
-··-- controLthaL1~A3(a)(2)
they had two captive training AJM-9Ms {CATM-9) and no o er or nance. The flight descended
did not recall any
to between 20-24,000 feet and proceeded to the contact. !1B43(a)(2)
indications via on-board sensor of the object. Their aircraft was not carrying a Forward Looking
Infrared (FLIR) pod onboard. As l1843(a)(2) remembers it, the radar Attack Display was clean
(no targets).

I

I

Summary Report on BAJ\SS UAP Analysis Capabilities
November 23, 201 0

Page 27

1843

2

1843

2

L _ _ _(a
_)_( _)_,...-=-=.=i.....,.._ _(a_)(_ _l _

.....were attem ting acquire the object visually as they heard "merge
1843(a)(2) plo.e .from- - - -According to 1843(a)(2) the first indication he had of the unknown contact
was a visua o a isturbance on the water below the AAV. As he scanned the area he gained a
visual on the object. It is important to note that when asked to describe the disturbance on the
water he stated that it was localized underneath the object, did not appear as a trail or wake, and
looked like frothy waves and foam almost as if the water was boiling.
At this oint 1843(a)(Z)

detached !1843(a)(2)
!which held at approximately 20,000 feet,
attempted a "helmet
escended to between 12-16,000 feet. 1843(a)(2)
at was unsuccessful. It is important to note that 1843(a)(2)
as using the Joint Helmet
Mounted Cuing System which will cue the aircraft sensors sue as e radar to 'lock on' to what
the pilot is looking at and it also has a recording capability. It may have been useful in this
situation but typically because of the large amount of head movement it is not practical. c::]J §4.~(~)(2)
1843(a)(2L i:=-lstated that the helmet' s recording capability was rarely used therefore he did not think to
atday.
~
1843 (a)(2)

communicated what they were seeing with ! =3eontrol-ana-said-thathe .hada 1843(a)(2)
runnmg ia ogue on the interflight radio withj1 843(a)(2)
!stated that the object
was "holding like a Harrier." (Referring to the AV-8B jet aircraft, which is capable of hovering
and Vertical/Short Takeoff and Landing (V/STOL) via thrust vectoring.) According to r-::1.~43(a)(2)
1843(a~_(?Ll
!the object' s shape was like an elongated egg or a ' Tic Tac' and had a discemable m ~
•
horizontal axis. However, the object was uniformly white across the entire body. It was
approximately 46 feet in length. 1843(a)(2)
escribed it as "solid white, smooth, with no
edges. It was uniformly colored wi no nace es, pylons, or wings." When asked to describe
the appearance, if it g lowed or reflected sunlight he said, "neither, it looked like it had a white
candy-coated shell, almost like a white board." His report differs from !1843(a)(2)
in that he
reported the object traveling level at approximately 500-1000 feet at approximately 500 knots.

I

1843(a)(2)

The object was pointed in a north/south orientation and was moving both north & south and east
& west, while maintainin a consistent altitude. These displacements, according to !1843(a)(2)
were minor. 1843(a)(2)
stated he then began a descent with the intention to take a close aboard
pass with the object in an attempt lo visually identify it. They began the decent as the rolled in
from about 10,000 ft and approximately 350 knots to take the object close aboard. 1843(a)(2)
pulled nose on and then pulled trail (aft) of the object. As they were maneuvering, the object 1843( )(2)
l"to recognize us." He assessed this from the fact th4ohject ( ~
appeared, according toj1843(a)(2)
"pointed" (realigned its axis) in the direction of their aircraft. At this time, according t
•., '
the disturbance on the water ceased.

.[ :=]

As they completed this maneuver, the ob·eel ascended quickly and pulled lift vector on and aft of
them at a supersonic speed. 1843(a)(2)
commanded the radar through the Short Range radar
set and asked for a picture from 1843(a)(2)
initially reported that the "picture was clean" (no
contact) but then stated "you' re not gomg to elieve this, it's at your CAP" meaning that the
AAV had flown to their training CAP, which was located in the southern end of the training area
and had climbed to approximately 24,000 feet. 1843(a)(2)
stated that the flight attempted to
stated that nothing was
locate both the object and the disturbance with no success. 1843(a)(2)
seen on the surface or subsurface and that there were no indications of the previous disturbance.
Summary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities
November 23, 2010

Page 28

Following the engagement, the flight rejoined and returned to the USS N imjtz_ When asked how
the jets functioned and if there was any indications of a system malfunction, he stated that, "the
jets were brand new, less than 1 hr n h m.
when asked, said that all aircraft systems were
They were working perfectly." 1843(a)(2)
functional. That there were no ID1Ss1on computer issues or avionics issues and that there was no
radio or communication interference and that they had entry into the Link-16 network. When
couldn' t confirm any physiological or psychological feelings that were out
asked, 1843(a)(2)
of the or mary.
1843(a)(2)
was a member ofVFA-41 and was the l._1843
_ _ _<a_H_2_) _ _ _ _ _ __,
1843(a}J?L .... .
flying wi 1843(a)(2)
They were a part of the second F/A- l 8F section airborne
!flight. The crews
at ay from VFA-41. Their flight launched following the !1 843(a)(2)
spoke with each other in the paraloft, discussed the object and that the flights were scheduled for
!flight toldl1843(a)(2)
flight what they saw and to
the same working area. !1843(a)(2)
try to see and record what they could.

I

There were no clouds and there was a discernable horizon. The time was approximately 1500L.
All on board systems were functiorung normally. The radar was in a standard search mode
(RWS/ 80NM/ 4bar/ intr) and the FLIR was in L+S slave (the FLIR would point in direction of
an L+S track). There was no radio or commurucation interference and they had entry into the
Link-16 network. Initial awareness of an object came via the radar. Accordjng to the radar 1843(a)(2)
dis la , the injtial tracks were at approximately 30-40 nm to the south of the aircraft. r7 1843(a)(2) was controlling the radar and FLIR and attempted multiple times to transition tFie
ra ar to mgle Target Track (SIT) mode on the object. The radar could not take a lock, the
b-sweep would raster around the hit, build an initial aspect vector (which never stabilized) and
!stated that
then would drop and continue normal RWS b-sweep. When asked, !1 843(a)(2)
there were no jamming cues (strobe, champagne bubbles, "any normal EA indications"). It "just
appeared as if the radar couldn't hack it." The radar couldn' t receive enough information to
create a single target track file. The FLIR, in L+S slave, pointed in the direction of the initial
track flies as the radar attempted lock. The FUR showed an object at 0 ATA and approximately
-5 deg elevation (Figure 9). According tq 1843(a)(2)
t'the target was best guess co-altitude
or a few thousand feet below," estimating the object to be between 15-20 thousand feet. The
object, according to the FLIR, appeared stationary (Figure l 0). There was no discemable
movement from the object with the only closure being a result of the aircraft' s movement. As
1843(a)(2)
watched the object it began to move out of FLIR field of view to the left. O tS4~(a)(2)
1843(a)(2) made no attempt to slew the FLIR and subsequently lost situational awareness to the
••
•••
object. The Flight continued with training mission with no further contact with object.

Summa1y Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities
November 23, 2010

Page 29

Figure 9. FUR in 'White Hot' Mode
Figure 10. FUR in "Black Hot" mode
Summary Report on 13/\J\SS l JJ\P /\nalysi" Capnhilitics
November 23. 20 10
Pngc 10

1843 (a)(2)
was clear in that he couldn't confirm that it was the same object as described by
1843 a 2
flight. He never had visual, only seeing the object via the FLIR. He reaffirmed
that all systems were functional. Following completion of the training portion, the section
returned to the shi. for a normal approach, landing and shutdown. The crew met in CVlC and
debriefed. 1843(a)(2)
said that the CJVC section attempted to collect his tapes but he
refused.
They proceeded to their ready room where they debriefed withl1843(a)(2)
land his f l ~
•
the tapes were made with a set being turned into the intelligence section. l...=jJ~.4~.(~)(2)
1843(a)(2) was not asked to sign any non-disclosure agreement and he is uncertain how far up
the chain the reporting went past his commanding officer. When askedJ1843(a)(2)
I couldn't
confirm any physiological or psychological. feelings that were out of the ordinary. He only
expressed a feeling ofconfusion during the event.

I

rorl

I

1843 (a)(2)
According to former!1843(a){2)
now a civilian working
who was a
!1843(a)(2)
I onboard the Louisville in November 2004 during the AAV activity
there were no unidentified sonar contacts in the vicinit of the aerial si htin ,s or an time durin ,
the o erations off the coast of California. The forme 1843(a)(2)
1843(a)(2) confirmed that there was no anomalous undersea activity during this period. There
was a 1ve ire exercise conducted by the USS Louisville during the period of and in the vicinity
of the AAV sightings; however, the weapon in use did not match the flight profile or visible
characteristics of the AAV. Additionally any live fire would have been coordinated throughout
the CSG and all air traffic would have been well aware of the launch and operati.on of the
weapon system. Aircraft would not have been vectored for the intercept of a US Weapon in
Oight. Based on the lack of detection of any unidentified sonar contacts it is highly unlikely that
an AAV operated below the surface of the ocean; it is possible that the AAV demonstrated the
ability to be cloaked or invisible to the human eye based on ilot re orting of the water
disturbance with no visible craft. Based on the assessment of 1843(a)(2)
if the AAV did
operate underwater undetected it would represent a highly a vance capability given the
advanced capability of our sensors.

----------------

Key Assessments According to DIA Report
•
•
•
•

•

The Anomalous Aerial Vehicle (AAV) was no known aircraft or air vehicle currently in
the inventory of the United States or any foreign nation.
The AAV exhibited advanced low observable characteristics al multiple radar bands
rendering US radar based engagement capabilities ineffective.
The M V exhibited advanced aerodynamic performance with no visible control surfaces
and no visible means to generate lift.
The AAV exhibited advanced propulsion capability by demonstrating the ability to
remain stationary with little to no variation in altitude transitioning to horizontal and/or
vertical velocities far greater than any known aerial vehicle with Uttle to no visible
signature.
The AAV possibly demonstrated the ability to 'cloak' or become invisible to the human
eye or human observation.

Summary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities
November 23,2010

Page 31

The AA V possibly demonstrated a highly advanced capability to operate undersea completely
undetectable by our most advanced sensors. The so called "Tic Tac" incident has many physics
and engineering aspects that may be studied with regards to understanding the performance
capabilities and propulsion mechanisms of the craft. Since there was lit1le hard data, most
analyses of the incident had to be made using either parametric studies or assumptions based on
eye witness testimony.
4.1.1
Analytical Solutions of Velocities and Accelerations Associated with "Tic Tac"
Performance
An initial starting point consisted of using basic physics formulas for the calculation of velocities
and accelerations based on the distance s the object traveled and the duration time I of the
incident. Since no exact duration was known, as the radar operator noted that it occurred in a
matter of "seconds," a parametric range from 0.5 seconds to 10 seconds was studied (assuming
instantaneous velocities and accelerations).
ds
v=-
dt
dv
a=dt
Flight is classified in six categories as shown in the table below.
Table 1. Mach Regimes
Regime
Subsonic
Transonic
Sonic
Supersonic
Hypersonic
High- hypersonic
Re-entry
Speeds
Mach
Number
< 1.0
0.8 - 1.2
1.0
1.0 - 5.0
5.0 - 10.0
10.0 - 25.0
> 25.0
Due to the lack of data, only the instantaneous velocity of the craft v and the instantaneous
acceleration a, were computable. For the velocity and deceleration witnessed, a negative sign is
implied to represent the direction component ofthe vector.
Assumptions:
1. Elevation of 60,000 ft to Sea Level - It was reported by radar observation the object
descended from approximately 60,000 ft to sea level in a matter ofseconds.
2. Matter of Seconds - A range of 0.5 seconds to 10 seconds was used for a parametric
study.
4.1.2
Summary of Analytical Velocity and Acceleration Solutions
Table 2 provides the computed values of instantaneous velocities and decelerations in ft/s and
mph and ft/sec2 and g respectively for each chosen .6t. Figure 11 through Figure 14 show
Summary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities
November 23, 2010
Page 32

non-continuous plots for velocity and acceleration in each unit for a specific 6t event duration.
As one may observe from the table and graphs, extremely small and small duration times
specifically between 0.5 and 5 seconds provide high velocities and accelerations. Most of the
values in the table represent extraordinary velocities and all fall between lhypersonic and re-entry
speed Mach regimes. Acceleration values also show a very high number ofg.
An examination of Table 2 at a 6t of5.0 sec reveals the average velocity of the craft was 12,000
ft/sec (8,182 mph or Mach 10.7). A very high deceleration value is also witnessed at 2400 ft/sec2
or 75 g. These are extraordinarily high values and would require some form of acceleration
manipulation to limit what a human pilot would experience and be able to survive.

Summary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities
November 23, 2010

Page 33

Table 2. Velocities and Accelerations of Tic Tac for Parametric Time Durations of Event

1

2

!1s
!1s

60000 feet
11.36364 miles

l'1t (sec)

V (ft/s)

v (mph)

0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
4.5
5.0
5.5
6.0
6.5
7.0
7.5
8.0
8.5
9.0
9.5
10.0

0
120,000
60,000
40,000
30,000
24,000
20,000
17,143
15,000
13,333
12,000
10,909
10,000
9,231
8,571
8,000
7,500
7,059
6,667
6,316
6,000

0
81,818
40,909
27,273
20,455
16,364
13,636
11,688
10,227
9,091
8,182
7,438
6,818
6,294
5,844
5,455
5,114
4,813
4,545
4,306
4,091

Mach
2
a (ft/s )
Number J

0.0
107.5
53.7
35.8
26.9
21.5
17.9
15.4
13.4
11.9
10.7
9.8
9.0
8.3
7.7
7.2
6.7
6.3
6.0
5.7
5.4

32.2 2
240,000
60,000
26,667
15,000
9,600
6,667
4,898
3,750
2,963
2,400
1,983
1,667
1,420
1,224
1,067
938
830
741
665
600

a (g)

12
7,453
1,863
828
466
298
207
152
116
92
75
62
52
44
38
33
29
26
23
21
19

Computed using the speed ofsound at sea level under standard conditions
Standard acceleration due to g avity

Summary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities
November 23, 2010

Page 34

Tic Tac Parametric Velocities for Selected Times of Event Duration
(Points are Not Continuous)
140000
I
I
I
I
100000
I
I
-
~
120000
'o
C
8
I
I
'
!
I
80000
I
I
.,,"'
-~
>-
'a
>"'
.l:!
I
I
l
60000
I
40000
I
I
~
l
I
◄►
♦
20000
◄►
◄►
♦
◄►
◄►
!
I
I
I
I
I
◄►
♦
I
'
l
◄
♦
◄►
♦
.
0
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
7.0
8.0
9.0
10.0
Time (seconds)
Figure 11 . Tic Tac Parametric Velocities for Selected nmes of Event Duration in ft/sec
Summary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities
November 23. 2010
Page 35

Tic Tac Parametric Velocities for Selected Times of Event Duration
(Points are Not Continuous)
90000
I
80000
I
I
70000
60000
I
I
I
'.[ 50000
I
!.
?:
0\I
a
cii 40000
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
♦
>
30000
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
♦
◄►
◄►
I
I
0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
t
5.0
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
◄►
I
I
I
I
20000
0.0
I
I
0
10000
I
◄►
6.0
,
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
j
'
I
◄►
◄►
7.0
I
i
I
i
◄►
8.0
♦
I
◄►
9.0
►
◄►
10.0
Time (seconds)
Figure 12. Tic Tac Parametric Velocities for Selected Times of Event Duration in mph
Summary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities
November 23, 201 0
Page 36

Tic Tac Parametric Accelerations for Selected Times of Event Duration
(Points are Not Continuous)
1000000
I
•I
100000
0
I
I
T 4t
..
I
10000
-
,:,
0
C
-..
8
5:
:!:.
C
0
1000
I
I
• .. •
I
I
.,:!
I
~
0
.;
I
100
4I
•
I
I'
~
c(
•I
!
...
•
I
•
0
4t
I
I
I
0
I
10
•
I
I
'
I
I
I
1
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4 .0
5.0
6.0
7.0
8.0
9.0
10.0
Tlme (seconds)
Figure 13. Tic Tac Parametric Accelerations for Selected Times of Event Duration in ft/sec2
Summary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities
November 23. 2010
Page 37

Tic Tac ParametricAccelerations for Selected Times of Event Duration
(Points are Not Continuous)
10,000
~-.-~--i-----~---~--~---~------~-- - - - - -
I .,
I
1,000 + - - - - -- -.- - - -,- - - + - - - - + - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - + - - - - + - - - - - - - I
••
•
0
•
1
1
1 00 +--------,..--,- - - + - - - - - ,1 ---1•- --.
-
.-~ - . ---+----~----+----+-----;
0
•
0
• 4►
•
0
•
1
i
10 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _- - + - - - - - - - - - - - + - - - - - - - - + I -_ - - - + - - - - - - 1•
I
I
1 - - -'IL ---...+~ - - - + - - - - ' - -1- ------+----'---+--~
' - - - - - - - + - ~--+---'----+----'-----------4-------'-' ----+-___..__
I
--I
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
7.0
8.0
9.0
10.0
lime (seconds)
Figure 14. Tic Tac Parametric Accelerations for Selected Times of Event Duration in g
Summary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities
November 23. 2010
Page 38

4.1.3 Numerical Analysis of Compressible Flow
Compressible fluid flow analyses were performed to visualize the steady state pressure,
temperature and Mach number contours around two craft shapes ("Tic Tac" and right circular
cylinder). The use of compressible fluid fl ow and modeling of air as an ideal gas assumed the
aerodynamics over the craft were not being controlled or modified through other means.
Steady state solutions for pressure, temperature and Mach number contours around both a
"Tic Tac" shape and .a right circular cylinder were obtained under subsonic, supersonic and
mixed conditions. The CFX module was capable of solving the three dimensional unsteady
Navier- Stokes equations in their conservation form as shown below in Cartesian coordinates in
the x, y and z directions numerically. For the steady state solutions, the transient terms were
unchanging and fall out of the equations below.

Momentum:

f)w

8w

8w

8w)

p ( 8t, + u {)x + v f)y + w f}z

fJp

f}z + µ

( fflw

fflw

fflw)

lJx2 + l)y2 + 8z2

+ P9: .

Continuity:

Energy:

where:
A - Area (m2)
g - gravitational acceleration (9.8 m/s2)
gx - x directional component of gravitational acceleration
gy - y directional component of gravitational acceleration
gz - z directional component of gravitational acceleration
e - specific internal energy (J/kg)
p - density of the fluid (kg/m3)
µ - dynamic viscosity of the fluid (Pa ·s)
p - pressure (Pa)
t - time (sec)
Summary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabi lities
November 23, 2010

Page 39

u - x velocity (m/s)
v - y velocity (mis)
w - z velocity (mis)
x - x coordinate
y - y coordinate
z - z coordinate
The following sections provide steady state pressure, temperature and Mach number contours
over the "Tic Tac" and right circular cylinder for velocities of 700 mph and 1500 mph with an
environmental air temperature of 223 K (-58°F). Attachment II and Attachment ill show
contours for subsonic speeds below 700 mph and supersonic increments between 700 mph and
1500 mph for the "Tic Tac" and a right circular cylinder respectively. A comparison of the
profiles of the "Tic Tac" geometry and that of a right circular cylinder was performed due to
other numerous reports of craft with similar capabilities but lacking curvature at the ends of the
craft. A flat 90° surface moving through the air would be expected to cause greater resistance
during flight.
Assumptions:
1. Elevation of 30,000 ft - It was reported by radar observation the object descended from

approximately 60,000 ft to sea level in a matter ofseconds. An average 6s is computed by:
6s

- Oft
=S2 -2 S1 = 60,000ft
= 30,000ft
2

2. Ambient Air Temperature of 223 K (-58F) - An approximate ambient environmental
temperature of 223 K was chosen in accordance with an average elevation in the range of
30,000 ft (which varies with weather conditions) as a starting point for computational
investigations.
3. Air Modeled as an Ideal Gas - Air Temperature, pressure and density are all interdependent
and are given by the relationship of the ideal gas law:

pRuT
M

p = --

where:

Ru - Gas Constant (8.3 14472 m3-Pa ·K- 1-mor1)
M - Molar Mass (g/mol)
T - Temperature (K)
Since the temperature and density of air decreases with altitude, so does the speed of sound,
hence a given true velocity results in a higher Mach number at higher altitudes. The slice used
for the contours was taken axially for each geometric configuration. Reports from aircrew on
sight indicate the object flew in a horizontal position. A 0° angle of attack was used in all cases
to try to replicate observed flight conditions.

Summary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities
November 23, 2010

Page 40

1.807et004
1.......

1311e+004

Figure 15. Tic Tac Pressure at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 700 mph with Mixed Inlet and
Supersonic Outlet

UIJ'etODI
2118e+002
2.174e+002
2532et002
1

Figure 16. Tic Tac Temperature at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 700 mph with Mixed Inlet and
Supersonic Outlet

Summm) Report 011 BJ\ASS l lJ\P J\nah sis Capabilities
November 23. 20 10

Page 41

1••··tlDltOGO
1
1101..000
1cme+oDO
tA40e-001
l .154e-001

Figure 17. Tic Tac Mach Number at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 700 mph with Mixed Inlet and
Supersonic Outlet

...

,

. ..

SANe+OOe
3-2449+005
2.. . .t-005
27439+005
24938.005

Figure 18. Tic Tac Pressure at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 1500 mph with Supersonic Inlet and
Supersonic Outlet

Sumrna11 Report on B/\/\SS l!/\P Anal) si-; C'apahilitics
November 23, 20 10

Page 42

•-.t002

• .253etOQ2
◄. 110e+002

s-.t002
3823o+002
3610et002

28;~~
2 677e•002
2 534e+002
2 390e•002
2..247e•D02

2 104c•002
[Kl

Figure 19. T ic Tac Temperature at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 1500 mph with Supersonic Inlet
and Supersonic Outlet

Figure 20. Tic Tac Mach Number at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 1500 mph with Supersonic Inlet
and Supersonic Outlet

Summai) Report on BAJ\SS llJ\P J\nu lysi-. Capabilities
November 23. 20 I 0

Pagr 43

2.,....
2.tM■ •-

2.ezee.ooz
2.113e+002
2.551e+002
2.S23e+002

Figure 21 . Cylinder Temperature at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 700 mph with Mixed Inlet and
Supersonic Outlet

Figure 22. Cylinder Mach Number at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 700 mph with Mixed Inlet and
Supersonic Outlet

Surnma1) R1:port on BAA~S l/AP Analy~i, Capithilitics
November 23. 20 I 0

Figure 23. Cylinder Pressure at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 1500 mph with Supersonic Inlet
and Supersonic Outlet

2Jtaee••
2.217..aDI
~

1.1231t+005
17S1e+OOt5
151De.ao5
1

1 Dallll~IID!§

a1m..aM
7,,..MCIIM
5MII..OD4

-1 WIA+j!IM
-3
(Pal

Figure 24. Cylinder Temperature at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 1500 mph with Supersonic Inlet
and Supersonic Outlet

Summary Report on HAASS UAP Analysi<. Capabilities

November 23, 2010

Page 45

2.1~
2..CMOetOOO
1~
1.718et000
1e32e+OOO
1496et000
Figure 25. Cylinder Mach Number at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 1500 mph with Supersonic
Inlet and Supersonic Outlet
4. 1.4
Summary and Conclusions of Compressible
umerical Analyses
ln the field of UAP studies, it is believed this pre liminary analysis of the "Tic Tac" incident is
the first of its kind to utilize a multi-industry standard FEA code to perform computational
studies. The cases used are provided as a basic demonstration of the CFX fluid fl ow module and
illustrate some of its capabilities, as well as a sample of some visualization tools.
4.1.4.1
"Tic Tac" Geometry
For the contour plots of pressure, temperature from I 00 mph up to 500 mph, gradual increases in
values are observed. with the most significant value change at the front of the object. The Mach
number values increase at the front sides of the object. Disturbance of air flow is witnessed in
the pressure and Mach contour profiles around the body.
Nearing the speed of sound al 700 mph, contours for pressure and Mach number started to show
a more pronounced shock as would be expected. Temperature values also showed a hi gher
increase at the front nose due to higher flow and air resistance over the body. Velocities higher
than 700 mph showed a drastic difference in values compared to those at JOO mph with pressure
differences in orders of magnitude. Al I , 100 mph. the temperature rises not only at the attack
nose, but started to even increase on the sides and in the wakes of ai r now. Detached shock
waves were witnessed in the pressure and Mach contours starting al 700 mph all the way up to
1.500 mph.
Summary Report on BAJ\SS UJ\P J\nal) sis Capabilities
November 23. 20 I 0
Page 46

4.1.4.2

Circular Cylinder Geometry

It would seem counter intuitive to have a craft with a flat face pushing through the air due to a
major increase in air resistance. However, there have been many reports of objects of just the
sort seen maneuvering in the skies. A comparison of the detrimental aerodynamic effects was
sought in relation to the smoother edged body.
At lower speeds, no large differences in values of pressures, temperatures or Mach numbers were
observed. There were, however, slight differences in the location and profiles of the values of
the "Tic Tac" geometry compared to the cylinder. None of these differences would indicate a
drastic difference in conventional lift performance between the two geometries. The same
appeared to hold true for higher speed scenarios, indicating no significantly different
aerodynamic lift advantages between the two geometries.

4.1.4.3

Outcome

Success was achieved in implementing the ANSYS Multiphysics and SolidWorks Solid
modeling program to create and run input cases for compressible fluid flow over both the
"Tic Tac" geometry and that of a right circular cylinder to illustrate pressure, temperature and
Mach contour profiles over both shapes. Separated shockwaves were witnessed in higher
velocity cases indicating that the possibility of a sonic boom or vibration may have been
perturbated into the environment. The actual propagation distance of these was not of interest in
this study and may be looked at in the future. It is doubtful the aircrew would have felt a shock
wave in the cockpit unless extremely close to the object while traveling at high rates of speed,
which the fighter j ets were not. These basic geometries and assumptions helped provide an
excellent starting point to create more complex transient cases that possibly incorporate heat
generation, electromagnetic effects, and acoustics. This is demonstrated in a basic model that
FEA algorithms describing multiphysics can provide to be an invaluable tool in gaining insight
into UAP flight characteristics and even possibly rule out improbable scenarios.

4.1.5

Numerical Analysis of Incompressible Flow of a UAP Entering Water

The problem studied was that of a solid disc shaped object descending through the air into a
body of liquid. The model created, details the descent of a solid disc shaped UAP into water. It
is assumed normal ambient conditions with a solid steel disc moving at a speed of 5 mis in the
negative y (downward) direction. The water surface is approximately 10 feet below the bottom
of the UAP. Water and air te~eratures are held at constant at 25°C and the gravitational
acceleration constant at 9.81 mis . Ambient pressure was a constant 1 atm , buoyancy effects
within the water were accounted for and the UAP was taken to be isothermal (no heat transfer
between the system and the surroundings). Three distinct phases were created; a gaseous phase
(air), the solid phase (UAP) and the liquid phase (water). Figure 26 displays the three
dimensional geometry depicting the distinct regions and boundaries.
The geometry was completed, and the necessary mesh was created in order to carry out the FEA
analysis. Meshing is the discretization of a continuous domain into a set of discrete sub-domains
called elements and is shown Figure 27. The governing equations were then solved for all

Summary Report on BAASS UA P Analysis Capabi lities
November 23, 20 I0

Page 47

elements within the domain. The accuracy of the solution increases with increasing number of
elements (refining of the mesh).
Typically, meshes are refined near domain borders or other places of interest; specifically where
the solution is desired (for example the edge of solid object where it is desired to determine the
amount of heat loss from the object). The solid UAP body was more refined than the air and
water domains because it was of primary importance to study fluid flow around the UAP and not
the flow of air/water further away from the solid domain. A close-up view of the refined mesh in
the solid UAP domain is seen in Figure 28.
Once the mesh was generated, then boundary and initial conditions were assigned to replicate
approximate physical conditions during the event. As the name implies, boundary conditions are
exact solutions to differential equations that exist on the outskirts of the different geometries.
These conditions must be met if the solution is to be correctly determined. Initial conditions are
time dependent relationships that describe the initial state of the problem. Thermophysical data
must be defined for each domain. The governing equations include the properties of the materials
involved (cp, µ, etc.) and an accurate analysis depends as much on the proper accounting ofthese
properties as on the proper identification of boundary conditions.
Boundary conditions on the solid UAP edges were set as a no slip surface. A no slip boundary
sets the fluid velocity at 0. That is to say that a fluid coming in contact with the surface will not
move (not slip). This is a typical boundary condition used when a fluid comes in contact with a
solid body. In addition, the outside walls of the boundary were set as no slip. It was assumed
that the walls were located far enough away from the UAP-water impact zone to play no part in
determination of fluid movement around the solid UAP body.
Thermophysical data was determined by material identification within the problem setup. The
UAP was defined as being made of steel, the liquid body was set as water and the gaseous body
was set to air. The initial velocity for the UAP was Omis, that is lo say the UAP initially starts at
rest. Total simulation time was set to 10 seconds with 0.2 seconds per time step (for a total of 50
time steps).

4.1.6 Numerical Analysis of Incompressible Flow of a UAP Entering Water Results
Upon completion of the simulation; an output file was created and stored for use in the post
processing portion of Workbench called CFX-IPost. Once the output file has been imported to
CFX- Post; a variety of results may be obtained. For this investigation, a fluid dynamic analysis
was performed. To best view the results; a plane (parallel to they axis) was created to bisect the
geometry (see Figure 29).
The creation of a plane contained within the geometry allows for easy analysis of the solution.
CFX-Post was used to determine the velocities of the air and water fluid domain, the pressure of
the system and through examination of the volume fraction of water; a recreation of the
appearance of a solid entering the water. An animated representation of the transient results was
created in an effort to understand how the trends in the specified variable change over time.
Figure 30 displays a still image of an animated result showing how the volume fraction of water
changed as the UAP descended into the water domain.
Summary Report on BAASS UA P Analysis Capabilities
November 23, 2010

Page 48

Manipulation of the created plane view allowed for a two dimensional analysis for a variety of
parameters. Figure 31 displays a still frame of the animation depicting how pressure varied
throughout geometry.
Figure 3 1 displayed the expected trend of an increasing pressure with increasing depth. A
re-creation of the physical appearance of the UAP impacting and descending into water may be
achieved through analysis of the transient animated results of volume fraction of water. Figure
32 displays a still shot of this animation after the UAP has impacted and entered the water
domain.
The radially expanding concentric circles display the resulting ripple effect after the solid has
penetrated through the surface of the water. Figure 33 displays a side view of the same result.
The original result animations from which the still screenshots (Figure 29 through Figure 33)
were taken are provided in .mpeg form. Jn addition to the preceding results, several animations
depicting transient trends of fluid density and fl uid velocity have been provided.

Summary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities
November 23, 2010

Page 49

0
y
35_000
0
17.500
70.00 (m)
52.50
Figure 26 Solid Three Dimensional Geometry of Disc and Water
Summar: Report on BA. \SS L\P \nal~sis Capabilities
November 23. 20 l 0
Page 50

Figure 27. Solid Three Dimensional Geometry Mesh of Disc and Water
SurnmUI} Rt:pon on BA.ASS CAP Analysis Capabilities
November 23. 2010
Page 51

0
6_000 (m)
3Jl00
1.500
4.500
Figure 28. Solid Three Dimensional Geometry Mesh of UAP Disc
Summar: Report on BA\SS C.\P An::il~sis Capabilities
, overnber 23. 20 l 0
Page 52

y
0
50.00 (m)
12.500
Figure 29. User Generated Cut Analysis Plane
Summa~ Report on BAASS L AP Anal:sis Capabilities
1 ovember 23. 2010
Pagl.! 53

7.0008-001
iU)OC>e.001
5.000.001
4 .000e-001
3.000e-001
2 .000e-001
1.oooe-001
1_000e-016
0
10000
Figure 30. Animated Result, Fluid 2 Volume Fraction
Summary Report on BA'\S L'/\P Anal)sis Capabilities
ovember 23. 2010
Page 54

Figure 31 . Total Pressure Around UAP
Summar: Report on BAASS CAP Anal~sis Capabilities
No,·ember 23. 2010
Page.! 55

Figure 32. Water Surface Effects From Solid Impact
Summa~ Report on BAASS L' <\P Anal~ sis Capabilities
November 23. 2010
Page 56

Figure 33. Water Surface Effects From Solid Impact (Side View)
Sumn1af} Rcpon on BAASc.; L .\P Analysis Capabilities
November 13. 2010
Pagt! 57

4.1.7 Summary and Conclusions of Numerical Analysis of Incompressible Flow of a UAP
Entering Water Results
The CFX-Post generated graphs and animations are illustrative samples of what ANSYS CFX is
capable of producing. The scenario was chosen due to its simple geometry, boundary conditions
and relative ease of computational requirements. A typical problem of this type when solved by
hand, would have taken weeks if not longer. This simulation incorporated a fluid dynamic
analysis and further analysis may incorporate numerous other multiphysics attributes in the study
of UAP. Heat transfer from a craft entering the earth's atmosphere as well as the effects of
varying craft size, shape and speed on wave generation during water impact could be studied just
as easily. In addition to detennining power requirements, achieved surface temperatures etc., re­
creations of eyewitness sightings may be.
Furthermore, electromagnetic capabilities allow for modeling of possible magnetohydrodynamic
(MHD) affects. Electrodynamics can show the energy required to create magnetic fields with
different materials as well as the propagation of electromagnetic waves through solid and liquid
mediums. Using careful design and properties of human tissue in the program it would be
possible to show effects on the human body from heat and high electric fields. Effects, such as
increase in body temperature or nervous system interruption may be able to be quantified in
ANSYS. This tool can greatly assist in the goal of studying human effects to reverse engineer
UAP technology.
4.2

ANALYSES OF SPHERICAL UAPS

4.2.1 Acoustical Analysis of a Spherical USO

Over the years, there have also been numerous reports USOs. In 1967, a UFO was reported
crashing into Shag Harbour, Nova Scotia. It was reported that hovering and flashing orange
lights were present, then it tilted at about a 45 degree angle and entered the water. A yellow light
was seen in the water moving and leaving a trail of yellow foam. The Canadian Coast Guard
was dispatched but by the time they arrived along with other vessels at the point of entry the
yellow foam was all that remained.
This is one of very few cases where governmental agency documents have formally declared an
unidentified flying object was involved. At least eleven people saw a low-flying lit object head
down towards the harbor. Multiple witnesses reported hearing a whistling sound "like a bomb,"
then a "whoosh," and finally a loud bang. Some reported a flash of light as the object entered the
water. Several interviewed military witnesses, including a diver involved in an attempted
recovery, have claimed an alien spacecraft was responsible. It was also claimed by several of the
was involved in recovery attempts. The case was also briefly
witnesses that the U.S. mili
investigated by the 1843(a)(2)
UFO study, which offered no explanation.
It has been proposed that this type of craft may operate using some sort of electromagnetic
frequency based propulsion system to control underwater "flight" and to achieve incredible
performance capabil.ities in velocity and acceleration.

Summary Report on B/\/\SS UAP Analysis Capabilities
November 23, 2010

Page 58

The three-dimensional acoustic wave equation 1s given below m the second order partial
differential equation:

and

c=

ft

where
B 0 - adiabatic bulk modulus (Pa)
c - speed ofsound in medium (mis)
p - pressure (Pa)
t - time (sec)
p - density of mediwn (kg!m3)
x - x coordinate
y - y coordinate
z - z coordinate
The fo llowing solutions are obtained by separation of variables in different coordinate systems.
Phasor solutions result, that is they have an implicit time-dependence factor of eiwt where
OJ = 2,ifis the angular frequency. The explicit time dependence is given by:

p(r, t ,k) = Real [p(r,k)e'wt)
Here k = ~ is the wav,e number and r is the displacement vector.
C

In Cartesian coordinates and Cylindrical coordinates respectively:

p(r, k) = Ae~kr
p(r,k) = A,ti,1>(kr) + B,ti,2>(kr)
where the asymptotic approximations to the Hankel functions, when kr ➔ oo, are

HJll(kr) ~

{f

Summary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities
November 23, 2010

e l(ltr- w/ 4)

Page 59

and in Spherical coordinates:

p(r, k).,.. Ae*ikr
r
Depending on the chosen Fourier convention, one of these represents an outward traveling wave
(real) and the other an unphysical inward travelling wave (imaginary).
Assuming USOs operate on a frequency driven system, an ANSYS Multiphysics 1/100th scale ¼
symmetry Acoustical full harmonic analyses was performed to study a spherical object of 10 m
in both air and water for a range of frequencies at standard conditions. Provided below are
contour plots for the real, imaginary and magnitude components of pressure and plots for
pressure as a function of radius in Pa.
Table 3. Properties of Water Used for A NSYS Harmonic Analyses
Property

Value

Water Density

1,000 kg/m

Speed of Sound

1,500 mis

Reference Pressure

1 >< 10-e Pa

3

Figure 34 and Figure 35 show the FEA mesh for 25 elements per wavdength and 50 elements
per wavelength for a 1,000 Hz analysis. Upon inspection of the maximum pressures shown in
Figure 36 and Figure 37, it is apparent the FEA model solution was mesh independent with a
pressure of 1,052 Pa for the 25 element per wavelength model and 1, 103 Pa for the 50 element
per wavelength model. Generally higher element models for meshes are considered more
accurate, but a cost in computational time may be seen in extremely large models. ln the runs
performed, the 25 element per wavelength model showed sufficient accuracy and reasonable
computation times. As frequency was adjusted higher, the elements per wavelength were
adjusted down to limit element numbers.

Summary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities
November 23, 2010

Page 60

Figure 34. Mesh Plot for 1,000 Hz with 2 5 Elements per Wavelength in Water
Summary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities
November 23. 2010
Page 61

Figure 35. Mesh Plot for 1,000 Hz with 50 Elements per Wavelength in Water
Sununary Report on BAASS UAP Anal~sis Capabilities
November 23. 20 l 0
Pagt..: 62

Figure 36. Contour Plot of Real Component of Pressure (Pa) for 1,000 Hz with 50 Elements per Wavelength in Water
Summat} Repon on BA.\SS t.: \P Anal~sis Capabilities
'o,ember 23. 2010
Page 63

Figure 37. Contour Plot of Real Component of Pressure (Pa) for 1,000 Hz with 50 Elements per Wavelength in Water
Summar~ Report on BAASS l'AP Analysis Capabilities
November 23. 20 I 0
Page 64

Figure 38. Contour Plot of Imaginary Component of Pressure (Pa) for 1,000 Hz with 25 Elements per Wavelength in Water
Summar) Report on BA.\SS CAP Anal~sis Capabilities
'\lo"ember 23. 2.010
Page 65

Figure 39. Contour Plot of the Magnitude of Pressure (Pa) for 1,000 Hz with 25 Elements per Wavelength in Water
Summ~ Report on BJ\ I\S, l. \P Anal~c;i!.- Cnpabilities
November 23. 2010
Page 66

Figure 40. Steady State Real Component of Pressure {Pa) as a Function of Radial Distance {m) Plot for 1,000 Hz with 25 Elements per
Wavelength in Water

Swnm:lf), Report on B.\..\SS L'AP Anal~sis Capabilities
1
0\'ember 23. 2010

Page 67

Figure 41 . Steady State Imaginary Component of Pressure (Pa) as a Function of Radial Distance (m) Plot for 1,000 Hz with 25 Elements per
Wavelength in Water

Summ..10 Rcpor' on BA \Sl.i CAP Anal~sis Capabilities
November 23. 2010

Page 68

Figure 42. Steady State Magnitude of Pressure (Pa) as a Function of Radial Distance (m) Plot for 1,000 Hz with 25 Elements per Wavelength in
Water

SwnmU0 Report on BAASS l'AP Analysis Capabilities
November 23. 2010

Page 69

Figure 43. Contour Plot of Real Component of Pressure (Pa) for 5,000 Hz with 25 Elements per Wavelength in Water
Swnmar: Report on BAASS UAP Anal:,,sis Capabilities
'ovemher 23. 2010
Page 70

Figure 44. Contour Plot of Imaginary Component of Pressure (Pa) for 5,000 Hz with 25 Elements per Wavelength in Water
Summar: Report on 13/\ \SS l \P Analysis Capabilities
November 23. 2010
Pagl! 71

Figure 45. Contour Plot of the Magnitude of Pressure (Pa) for 5,000 Hz with 25 Elements per Wavelength in Water
Summar: Report on BA.ASS L .\P Analysis Capabilities
November 23. 2010
Pag~ T2.

Figure 46. Steady State Real Component of Pressure (Pa) as a Function of Radial Distance (m) Plot for 5,000 Hz with 25 Elements per
Wavelength in Water

Summ~ Report on BMSS UAP Anal~sis Capabilities
November 23. 2010

Page 73

Figure 47. Steady State Imaginary Component of Pressure (Pa) as a Function of Radial Distance (m) Plot for 5,000 Hz with 25 Elements per
Wavelength in Water

Summar: Report on BAASS l AP Anal~sis Capabilities
November 23. 2010

Page 74

Figure 48. Steady State Magnitude of Pressure (Pa) as a Function of Radial Distance {m) Plot for 5,000 Hz with 25 Elements per Wavelength in
Water

Summary Report on 81\J\SS UAP Analysis Capabilitil!s
November 23. 2010

Page 75

Figure 49. Contour Plot of Real Component of Pressure (Pa) for 10,000 Hz with 25 Elements per Wavelength in Water
Swnm.10 Report on BA,\<:;S L \P Anal~sis Capabilities
November 23. 2010
Page 76

Figure 50. Contour Plot of Imaginary Component of Pressure (Pa) for 10,000 Hz with 25 Elements per Wavelength in Water
Summar) Report on B \ , \SS LAP Anal~ sis Capabilities
ovember 23. 2010
Pag1.: 77

Figure 51 . Contour Plot of the Magnitude of Pressure (Pa) for 10.000 Hz with 25 Elements per Wavelength in Water
Summar: Repon on BA:\SS LAP AnnJysis Capabilities
November 23. 2010
Page 78

Figure 52. Steady State Real Component of Pressure (Pa) as a Function of Radial Distance (m) Plot for 10,000 Hz with 25 Elements per
Wavelength in Water
Summfil), Report on BA,\SS L' '\P An.J~sis Capabilities
November 23. 2010
Page 79

Figure 53. Steady State Imaginary Component of Pressure (Pa) as a Function of Radial Distance (m) Plot for 10,000 Hz with 25 Elements per
Wavelength in Water

Sumrnru: Report on B/\.l\SS VAP Analysis Capabilities
November 23. 2010

Page 80

Figure 54. Steady State Magnitude of Pressure (Pa) as a Function of Radial Distance (m) Plot for 10,000 Hz with 25 Elements per Wavelength in
Water

Summary Report on BAASS UAP Anal;sis Capabilities
November 23. 2010

Page 81

4.2.1.1

Summary and Conclusions of Acoustic Analyses

A successful analysis of a USO was conducted using a full harmonic acoustics simulation. The
plots of the real and imaginary vaJues showed good agreement with the expected theoretical
solutions. It may be concluded from the contour plots and graphs that the varying frequencies
produce acoustics pressures far out from the actual source and decline in an inverse square law
relationship. In the future, ships and submarines could possibly detect these pressure
disturbances and a frequency of the mode ofoperation could be calculated with a known distance
from the vessel.
4.2.2

ANSYS Multiphysics Electromagnetic Capabilities

The electromagnetic capabilities of ANSYS Multiphysics include a full-wave electromagnetic
solver applicable to resonant, propagating, radiation and scattering phenomena in the frequency
domain. RF or microwave passive components, antennas, attenuators, interconnects and related
high frequency structures may be modeled for use in applications of stealth, electronic warfare
and directed high energy applications. Post-processing caJculations provide electric and
magnetic field intensity, quality factor, scattering matrix parameters, voltage, current,
characteristic impedance, radar cross section, far and near electromagnetic fields beyond the
modeled domain, antenna patterns, including period structures, and Joule losses (ANSYS, Inc.,
2009). Magnetohydrodynamics may also be modeled in development of propulsion units and
power generation, electron beam dynamics and electricaJ discharges. The Maxwell Equations
below provide the basis for electromagnetic calculations.

V. D = Pe
aD

V x H = J +at
aB
VxE=- ­

at

V· B = 0
where:

B - magnetic induction field (tesla)
D - displacement field (C/m2 )
E - electric field (V/m)
H - magnetic field (Nm)
J - current density
Pe - charge density

Summary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities
November 23, 2010

Page 82

4.2.3

Radar Cro s Section Ana lysis of a Spherical UFO

M any U AP have been reported across the globe. Pilots have reported seeing these craft in the
air, but when asked for confirmation of other aircra!l in the area, air traffic control reports
nothing on radar.
Only a tiny fraction or energy is bounced back to the recei ving antenna, even though many
megawatts of power may be transmitted in a single pulse. The amount of power returned from a
target lo Lhe transmitting radar depends on four maj or factors:
I . The power transmitted in the direction of the ltlrgel.
2. The amount or power that impacts the target and is ref1el:led back in thc direction or thc
antcnnu. This is din:l:tly rlllational lo the range between the antenna and target and thc
target's RCS.
3. The amount or n.:Jkcted power that is recei ved by the antenna.
4. The length ortime in which the antenna is pointed a l the target.

Pow, , uf W l\lt••
R,ul1,1I1•d l ow,11 d T,111w1

f r,tt 11011 o f

H,1 i..s, ''" "'
C:.tpllllflll hy

r,,1r: 1111n of

Alllt•llllol

lnll'fl Plllf'd Pm,\lt'I
Tu111• 011

Sc ,1 111 u•cl lm,•J1d H,IC l,H

1,11\l"I

Figure 55. Factors that Determine the Energy Returned by a Target (Aerospaceweb.org , 201 0)

Power flux is used l o describe the relationship between these variables. The further the radar
wave travel s, the greater the power transmitted decrease because it is spread over a larger area.
2
The inverse squarc law of the range R or 1/R governs the area over which the power i s spread
from the transmitting radar. The power flux or power density of the transmillcd radar wave at
the range of the target has a special name called the incident power densi ty ( Pincldcm) -

Summary Report on BJ\/\SS U/\P Analysis Capahilitics
November 2). 2010

Page 83

t--------~-R

Power reftecled back to
the radar depends on the
power lntercepled by the target
and the target ortentatton

~pow,r•lao
eprNda equally I I It
retums to the radar

Figure 56. Effect of Distance from the radar to the Target on the Power Density (Aerospaceweb.org ,

2010)

When the radar wave reaches the target, a portion is reflected back to the antenna. l n addition,
2
4
the reflected power also dissipates at 1/R. therefore it is reduced by a factor of 1/R. roundtrip by
the time it is returned to the antenna. The ability of a radar system lo detect a target depends on
whether the amount or power returned is great enough to be difTerentiated from internal noise,
ground clutter, background radiation, and other sources of interference. This is defined as the
signal to noise ratio. The object of stealth is to absorb or reflect waves away from receiving
antenna and/or jam or propagate a false wave back to its source so that the target is nearly
impossible to detect or track.

SumnHlr) Report on BAI\SS l AP Analysi" C'apahilitics
November 23. 2010

Page 84

The amount of power that is reflected back to the radar depends largely on a quantity called the
radar cross section (RCS). RCS (cr) is technically an area and typically expressed in square
meters (rn2) and depends on the following three factors:
Geometric cross section:

The area of the object presented to the antenna or projected area is known as the geometric cross
section. The area varies depending on the angle, or aspect, seen by the radar. The geometric
cross section (A) determines how much power transmitted by the radar (P incident) is intercepted by
the target (Pintercepted) according to the following equation:
Pintercepted

= APincident

Reflectivity:

The reflectivity is the fraction of the intercepted power that is reflected by the target, regardless
of direction. An object doesn' t always reflect equally from all directions as some parts are flat or
curved producing varying radar reflection and some of the power is absorbed by the object.
Objects that have radar Absorbent Materials (RAM) and radar Absorbent Structures (RAS) are
designed using internal reflectors to trap incoming radar waves. The power received by the
antenna after scattering or reflecting off the target is equal to the intercepted power less whatever
portion of that power is absorbed by the target. The reflectivity is the ratio of power scattered by
the target (Pscattcr) to the power intercepted by the target (Pintcrccptcd),

. ·t y =
Re fl ect LVL

pscatter
A Pintercepted

Directivity:

The directivity is related to reflectivity but refers to the power scattered back in the direction of
the receiving antenna. The power that is reflected toward the antenna is called the backscattered
power (Pbackscancr), Directivity is the ratio of the power that is backscattered in the direction of
the antenna to the power that would have been scattered in that direction if the scattering were in
fact uniform in all directions. Isotropic power cPisotropic) is the power scattered in a perfect sphere
over a unit solid angle of that sphere.
Pbackscatter
Pbackscatter
. t. ·t
Direc
LVL y = p
= l
isotropic

4rr Pscatter

The reflected power will be much greater or much smaller than the isotropic power depending on
how the target is orie nted to the transmitting antenna. The directivity, therefore, will be much
greater than l when the target returns a strong backscatter in the direction of the receiving
antenna and much less than I when the backscatter is small.
These three factors can be combined to determine the complete RCS (cr) for a target.
Summary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities
November 23, 20 10

Page 85

RCS= CT= Geometric Cross Section x Reflectivity x Directivity
CT= 4TC

Pbackscatter
Pintercepted

The importance of RCS can best be understood by looking at an equation relating the RCS of the
target to the energy received by the antenna.

where
S = signal energy received by the radar
Pavg = average power transmitted by the radar
G = gain of the radar antenna
er = RCS
Ae = effective area of the radar antenna, or "aperture efficiency"
to, = time the radar antenna is pointed at the target (time on target)
R = range to the target
Figure 57 shows a target that presents the same aspect to the radar at ranges from 1 to 50 miles.
At a range of 50 miles, the relative power received by the radar is only 0.00000016, or
1.6 x I 07 % of the strength at one mile. This diagram graphically illustrates how significant the
effect of energy dissipation is with distance, and how sensitive radars must be to detect targets at
even short ranges.

Summary Report on BAASS UAP A11alysis Capabilities
November 23, 2010

Page 86

, 0
a:
w
~
0
Q.
o 05
w
>
w
CJ
w
a:
Q4-.....;:=--- - - - - - . . . - - - - - - - -- - , ~ - - - -
o
10
20
30
40
50
RANGE (M ILES)
Figure 57. Reduction in the Strength of Target Echoes with Range (Aerospaceweb.org , 2010)
Furthermore, every radar system has a minimum signal energy it can detect, a quantity called
Smin• This minimum signal energy along with antenna design and scan rate determine the
maximum range (Rmax) at which a given radar can detect a given target.
Summary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities
November 23, 2010
Page 87

Geometry
Description
Maximum
RCS
Comments
Square
12x a 4
trihedral corner a= ----=-l?
reflector
Strongest radar return due to
triple reflection of incident wave
Right dihedral
S. 8 2t,2
corner reflector a = - - - -
Second strongest radar return
due to double reflection of
incident wave; decreases from
maximum slowly with changing 8
and rapidly with changing <p
4s a2b2
Third strongest radar return due
to direct reflection of incident
wave; decreases rapidly as
incidence angle changes from
perpendicular
•
l?
Flat plate
CJ=----
l?
Right circular
cylinder
2w a b2
a= - - -
A
•
Sphere
CJ=W 8
2
Strong radar return as aspect (8)
changes, but decreases rapidly
as azimuth (<p) changes
Produces the same isotropic
return in all directions
Figure 58. Geometry, Description and Maximum RCS(Aerospaceweb.org , 2010)
Summary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities
November 23, 2010
Page 88

RCS in square meters can be converted to dBsm by the following equation.
dBsm = l 0log(RCSmi)
It can be difficult to directly compare RCS estimates from one object to another since the RCS
varies wildly depending on aspect, radar frequency and wavelength, and the fidelity of the
receiver. Figure 59 illustrates typical RCS values for aircraft and other objects, ranging from
insects and birds up to large ground vehicles and ships. The RCS of a stealth aircraft is typically
multiple orders of magnitude lower than a conventional plane and is often comparable to that of
a small bird or large insect.
Comparlaon of Typical Radar c.,,.. 8ectlone In Square M■lira
.lllt
I
-.tt
I
MIC1I
.....
I
.,
I
I'
•I
- ......... -........
..... _...,......
I
I
I
1
-UMr---WIICU
■ ,-.-11a•1CU
-,- MBllil\
..J.JI f
Figure 59. Radar Cross Section Comparison (Aerospaceweb.org , 2010)
A one-half symmetry analysis of the radar cross section of a UAP sphere with a dielectric
coating was performed. Assuming the bottom limit of an ultrahigh frequency (UHF) very long
range radar system is 300 MHz, a full scale RCS full harmonic analysis was performed to study a
spherical object of 10 m in air with a 1 m dielectric coating layer. Provided in Figure 64 is a
contour plot for the electric field distribution.
Figure 60 and Figure 61 show the FEA mesh for 25 elements per wavelength and 50 elements
per wavelength for a 300 MHz RCS analysis.
Summary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities
November 23, 2010
Page 89

Figure 60. Mesh of ½ Symmetry UFO Sphere with 25 Elements per Wavelength
Summar:- Report on BAASS CAP Anal) sis Capabilities
November 23. 20 I0
Page 90

Figure 61 . Mesh of½ Symmetry UFO Sphere with 50 Elements per Wavelength
Summary Report on B .\.\SS C I\P Analysis Capabilities
ovember 23. 2010
Page 91

Table 4. Normalized radar Cross Section for a 10 m Metallic Sphere with a 1 m Dielectric Coating in
Decibels for 300 MHz and 25 Elements per Wavelength

PHI (Deg) THETA (Deg)
0. 000
0. 000
0. 000
5. 000
0. 000
10. 000
0. 000
15. 000
0. 000
20. 000
0. 000
25 000
0. 000
30. 000
0. 000
35. 000
0. 000
40. 000
0. 000
45. 000
0. 000
50. 000
0. 000
55. 000
0. 000
60. 000
0. 000
65. 000
0. 000
70 000
0. 000
75. 000
0. 000
80. 000
0. 000
85. 000
0. 000
90. 000
0. 000
95. 000
0.000
100. 000
0. 000
105. 000
110 000
0. 000
0. 000
115. 000
0. 000
120. 000
0. 000
125. 000
0. 000
130. 000
0. 000
135. 000
0. 000
140. 000
0. 000
145. 000
0. 000
150. 000
0. 000
155. 000
0. 000
160. 000
0. 000
165. 000
0. 000
170. 000
0. 000
175. 000
0. 000
180. 000

Normalized RCS (dB)
-0. 17461E+01
-0. 18396E+01
-0 20891E+01
-0 24059E-t-OI
-0 26306E+01
-0. 25683E+Ol
-0. 21056E+01
-0. 13090E+OI
-0. 36528E+OO
0. 54501E+OO
0. 13011E+OI
0. 18315E-t 01
0. 20883E+OI
0. 20270E+01
0. 15903E+01
0. 69095E+OO
-0. 81414E+OO
-0. 31541E+OI
-0. 64801E+OI
-0. 85723E+OI
-0. 64262E+OI
-0. 16586E+O I
0 10839E+OI
0. 29983E-t-OI
0. 43027E+01
0. 51444E+OI
0. 56415E+01
0. 59202E+OI
0. 6l375E+01
0. 64662E+01
0. 70226E+01
0. 77921E+01
0. 86493E+01
0. 94471E-t0I
0. l0076E+02
0 10474E+02
0. l0609E+02

Summar) Report on BAASS lJAP Analysi" Capahilities
Novcmhc, 21. 20 I0

Page 92

Figure 62. Normalized radar Cross Section Plot for a½ Symmetry 10 m Metallic Sphere with a 1 m Dielectric Coating in Decibels for 300 MHz
and 25 Elements per Wavelength
~ummai:, Report on B \J\SS L '\P Anal~sis Capabilities
ovember 23. 2010
Page 93

Table 5. Normalized radar Cross Section for a 10 m Metallic Sphere with a 1 m Dielectric Coating in
Decibels for 300 MHz and 50 Elements per Wavelength
PHI (Deg)

THETA (Deg)

Normalized RCS (dB)

0. 000
0. 000
0. 000
0. 000
0. 000
0. 000
0. 000
0. 000
0. 000
0. 000
0. 000
0. 000
0. 000
0. 000
0. 000
0 000
0 000
0 000
0. 000
0. 000
0. 000
0. 000
0 000
0 000
0 000
0 000
0 000
0. 000
0. 000
0. 000
0. 000
0. 000
0. 000
0. 000
0 000
0. 000
0. 000

0. 000
5. 000
10. 000
15. 000
20 000
25. 000
30. 000
35. 000
40. 000
45. 000
50. 000
55. 000
60. 000
65 000
70. 000
75 000
80. 000
85. 000
90. 000
95. 000
100 000
105 000
110 000
115 000
120. 000
125 000
130 000
135. 000
140. 000
145. 000
150. 000
155. 000
160 000
165 000
170. 000
175. 000
180. 000

-0. 13803E+OI
-0. 14503E+01
0 16341E+01
-0. 18535E+01
-0. 19807E+Ol
-0. 18742E+-01
-0. 14592E+-01
-0. 78502E+OO
0. 11714E-01
0. 78777E+OO
0. 14360E+-OI
0. 18849E+-O1
0. 20821E+01
0. 19780E-t01
0 15109E+01
0 58974E+OO
-0. 93250E+OO
-0. 32902E+01
-0. 66390E+0I
-0. 87047E+0I
0 54874E+01
0 17016E+01
0. 10488E+0l
0 29700E+0l
0. 42801E+01
0. 51239E+01
0. 56159E+01
0. 58773E+01
0. 60608E+0I
0. 6341 IE+0I
0. 68464E+01
0. 75769E+-01
0 84125E+01
0 92021E+-01
0 98300E+-01
0. 10228E+02
0. 10364E+02

Summar) Report on Bl\\~~ I /\ P Analysis Capabilities
Novcmbct 23. 20I 0

Page Q.:.f

Figure 63. Normalized radar Cross Section Plot for a ½ Symmetry 10 m Metallic Sphere with a 1 m Dielectric Coating in Decibels for 300 MHz
and 50 Elements per Wavelength

Summa~ Report on BA.l\.SS C \.P Anal~sis Capabilities
ovember 13. 1010

Page 95

Figure 64. Electric Flied Contour in V/m for a ½ Symmetry 10 m Metallic Sphere with a 1 m Dielectric Coating in Decibels for 300 MHz and 25
Elements per Wavelength

Summary Report on BA1\SS l '_\P Anal~sis Capabilities
ovember 23. 2010

Page 96

4.2.3.1

Summary and Conclusions of RCS Analysis

A successful analysis of a spherical UAP RCS was conducted using a full harmonic
electromagnetic simulation. Upon inspection of the values of normalized RCS at 90°, the dB
shown in Table 4 and Table 5, it is apparent the FEA model solution was mesh independent with
a pressure of -0.64801 E+0l dB for the 25 element per wavelength model and -0.66390E+0 l dB
for the 50 element per wavelength model. In the runs performed, the 25 element per wavelength
model showed sufficie nt accuracy and reasonable computation times. The normalized RCS plots
and electric field contour illustrate the variation of RCS dB and V/m values over a range of 0 to
180°. As one would expect, the values are largest at the point of incident of the radar wave and
some reflection and also decrease in magnitude were witnessed around the sphere. Various
shapes of UAPs may be evaluated for RCS and the resulting electric field due to an incidental
radar wave is also attainable. This information may be used in the future for cases reported to
determine the prominence of an object's expected RCS and whether similar radar returns were
received.

Summary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities
November 23, 2010

Page 97

5.

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION

Compressible and incompressible fluid flow, dynamics, acoustics and radar theory all were
provided in this report to give the reader a brief overview and understanding of the numerous
physical equations that may be applied to reported UAP and USO behavior. Numerical solutions
to these partial differential equation systems (many of which do not posses analytical or closed
form solutions) which describe the physics of the event are achieved with millions ofelements to
model the object domain and medium. Each element may have numerous sets of coupled
physical equations that need be solved by passing through many different computational
iterations until convergence is achieved. BAASS is one of the few companies possessing the
expertise, computer software and computational platforms to achieve such sophistication in
numerical studies of UAP.
Compressible fluid flow analyses were performed to calculate and visualize the steady state
pressure, temperature and Mach number contou rs around two non- conventional craft shapes. A
solid disc shaped object descending through the air into a body of liquid was investigated to
provide visual simulation of the distmbancc produced on the surface of the water through use of
incompressible fluid flow. The USO analyses were performed using a full harmonic acoustics
simulation and a spherical UAP RCS model was completed using a full harmonic
electromagnetic simulation. For the individual summary and conclusions of each analytical and
numerical study, see Sections 4.1.2, 4.1.4, 4.1.7, 4.2.1.1, and 4.2.3.1 of this report.
From a more general perspective, BAASS was created in 2008 in order to facilitate the long term
research and development of novel and emerging future technologies worldwide as they
specifically relate to air and spacecraft.. A large component of the BAASS mission is to study in
depth the performance characteristics of UAP and USOs. From the data accrued, it is also
BAASS's mission to produce a Threat Assessment of UAP and USO performance and
capabilities. As a first step in accomplishing this mission BAASS has I) acquired significant
field data collection capabilities, both human and instrumented, 2) built the largest known UAP
performance and behavior Data Warehouse in the world and 3) acquired advanced computational
ability to analyze the data accrued.
Research and development necessary for the procurement of the technology required for
advanced space and weapons systems are conducted through use of computational Multiphysics
FEA, development of computer code, experimentation, material science testing and
manufacturing of prototypes in both BAASS in-house and collaborating facilities and
laboratories. Academic areas of concentration include Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD),
Heat Transfer, Nuclear Engineering, Electromagnetics and Radio Frequencies (RF), Theoretical
and Computational Physics, Biological Sciences and Chemistry.
Theoretical and computational applications, as well as experimentation on components of
non-conventional propulsion systems is under way to provide for future development of vehicles
that are capable of operating in the atmosphere, under water and in space. Operation of the
vehicle in different mediums, as well as a goal of hypersonic flight would provide superior
performance in its abi lity to reach intended targets, faster delivery of weapons, greater effective
Summary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities
November 23,2010

Page 98

range and an engagement capability enabling employment of complex tactics against multiple
targets across multiple domains. This research intends to provide innovative approaches and
concepts for aircraft, propulsion, and flight technologies that demonstrate significant advances in
performance and capabilities beyond those in operation today.
This report outlined software, equipment and database descriptions along with select theory,
analytical and numerical solutions for UAP incidents through engineering and physics analyses.
Many analyses of UAP may use analytical or closed form solutions to solve the equations that
describe the physics of an event. Where analytical solutions do not exist or the geometry is too
complex, BAASS incorporates ANSYS Multiphysics to provide a powerful computational
platform to solve large problems numerically, while combining and solving many different
physical equations. The combination of computational software with field measurement
equipment and historical databases of UAP events allows BAASS to utilize state of the art
engineering techniques and tools to assess the operational capabilities of UAP and USOs. A
greater understanding of these objects will allow for an accurate threat assessment, as well as
provide the physics behind the incredible performance attributes that some have displayed.
BAASS' acquired knowledge and capabilities are leading the way to quantum leaps in
technology for travel in the atmosphere, space and under water, along with advances in
armament and defense systems.

Summary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities
November 23, 2010

Page 99

6.
REFERENCES
1843(a)(2)
Summary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities
November 23, 2010
Page 100

1843(a)(2)
Summary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities
November 23, 2010
Page IOI

SYMBOLS AND ACRONYMS
A - Area
AAV - anomalous aerial vehicle
~ - effective area of the radar antenna, or "aperture efficiency"

B - magnetic induction field
BAASS - Bigelow Aerospace Advanced Space Studies
Ba - adiabatic bulk modulus
c - speed of sound in medium
CFO - computational fluid dynamics
CSG - Carrier Strike Group
D - displacement field
DIA - Defense Intelligence Agency
E - electric field
FEA - Finite Element Analysis
FLIR - forward looking infrared
fluid structure interaction
g - gravitational acceleration
G - gain ofthe radar antenna
GB - gigabyte
gx - x directional component of gravitational acceleration
gy - y directional component of gravitational acceleration
gz - z directional component of gravitational acceleration
H - magnetic field
HOV - High Definition Video
J - current density
k - wave number

Summary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities
November 23,2010

Page 102

M - molar mass
MHD - magnetohydrodynamics
p - pressure
Pavg -

average power transmitted by the radar

Pbackscatter - backscattered power
Pincidcnt - incident power density
Pin1ercep1ed - power intercepted by the target
Pisotropic - isotropic power
Pscauer - power scattered by the target
R - range to the target
Rmax - maximum range
Ru- gas constant
radar - radio detection and ranging
RCS - radar cross section
RF - radio frequency
S - signal energy received by the radar
Smin - minimum signal energy
T - temperature
TB - terabyte
t - tirne
t0 1 = time the radar antenna is pointed at the target (time on target)
u - x velocity
v -y velocity
w - z velocity
x - x coordinate
y - y coordinate
z - z coordinate
Summary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities
November 23, 2010

Page 103

UAP - unidentified aerial phenomena
UAV - unmanned aerial vehicle
UFO - unidentified flying object
UHF - ultra high frequency
USO - unidentified submerged object
E-

specific internal energy

µ - dynamic viscosity of the fluid
p - density of the fluid
Pe - charge density
cr - radar cross section

w - angular frequency

Summary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities
November 23, 2010

Page 104

ATTACHMENT I - ANSYS INPUT FILES
USO ANSYS Multiphysics Acoustics Input File Example

!-----------------------------------------------------------! 1/100th Acoustical Model ofa IOm Spherical USO in Water
! at 1000 Hz

!-----------------------------------------------------------!-----------------------------------------------------------! Define variables for problem:
! Radiating Sphere ofRadius SPHRRADS with uniform surface
! velocity of VELOCITY oscillating at FREQUENC
!-----------------------------------------------------------*set,FREQUENC, 1000
*set,VELOCITY,0.005
*set,Pl ,acos(-1)
*set,SPHRRADS,0. 1
*set,TOLER,0.0001
!-----------------------------------------------------------! Fluid properties:
! Density, Speed of sound in water, Reference pressure
!-----------------------------------------------------------*set,WATRDENS, 1000
*set,WATRSONC, 1500
*set,REFEPRES, 1E-6
!-----------------------------------------------------------! Geometry info
! Infinite radius at INFIRADS meters
! INFIXOFF, TNFJYOFF not used right now...
!-----------------------------------------------------------*set,TNFIRADS,5
*set,INFIXOFF,0.0
*set,TNFIYOFF,0.0
!-----------------------------------------------------------! Mesh info
! Use mapped mesh? YES=l NO=0 (use NO for now)
! Elements per wavelength (EPW)
!-----------------------------------------------------------*set,MAPDMESH,0
*set,TRIMESII , I
*set,EPW ,50
Summary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities
November 23, 2010

Page 105

!-----------------------------------------------------------! Graphics settings
! Set title and subtitles
! Make sure the legend is always on (/plopt,info,on)
Put global triad at right top corner (/triad,rtop)
! Turn on Full Graphics because of DDTSREP#16215
!-----------------------------------------------------------/title,Uniformly Radiating Sphere, EPW=%EPW%
/stitle, I ,Sphere radius of %SPHRRADS%m
/stitle,2,Frequency at %FREQUENC%Ilz
/stitle,3,Uniform velocity of%VELOCITY%m/s
/stitle,4,Infinite Boundary of%INFIRADS%m at (%INFIXOFF%,%1NFIYOFF%)
/plopt,info,on
/triad,rtop
/graphics,full
!-----------------------------------------------------------1Enter Preprocessor
!-----------------------------------------------------------/prep7
!-----------------------------------------------------------1Define elements
I I = fluid w/ structure
! 2 = fluid no structure
I 3 = infinite fluid
! Define elements and keyopts (et) (keyopt)
I Define real constants (r)
! Define material properties (mp)
!-----------------------------------------------------------et, 1,fluid29
keyopt,1,2,0
kcyopt,1,3, 1
et,2,fluid29
keyopt,2,2, 1
keyopt,2,3, 1
et,3,fluid 129
keyopt,3,3, 1
r,1,REFEPRES
r,2,REFEPRES
r,3,INFIRADS,0,0,
mp,dens, I,WATRDENS
mp,sonc, 1, WATRSONC
mp,dens,2,WATRDENS
Summary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities
November 23, 20 I0

Page 106

mp,sonc,2,W ATRSONC
mp,sonc,3, WATRSONC

!-----------------------------------------------------------! Create geometry
! Create five 90 degree quarter circles (pcirc)
! Merge keypoints (nummrg,kp)

!-----------------------------------------------------------pcirc, 1,SPHRRADS,0,90,
pcirc,2, 1,0,90,
pcirc,3,2,0,90,
pcirc,4,3,0,90,
pcirc,5,4,0,90,
nummrg,kp

!-----------------------------------------------------------! Mesh
Set global element size based on EPW above
Map with quads, quad-dominant for free mesh (mshape,0)
Mesh mapped or free (mshkey)
Set area attributes (aatt)
! Mesh all areas (amesh)
! Set plot controls based on element type number

!-----------------------------------------------------------esize,(WATRSONC/FREQUENC)/EPW
mshape,TRIMESH
mshkey,MAPDMESH
aatt,2,2,2
amesh,all
/pnum,type,1
/num,1
/auto
eplot

!-----------------------------------------------------------! Rotate all nodes in cylindrical CS

!-----------------------------------------------------------csys, 1
nrotate,all

!-----------------------------------------------------------! Change elements near center to fluid with struct present
!------------------------------------------------------------

type,1
real, I
mat,1

Summary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities
November 23, 2010

Page 107

nsel,s,loc,x,SPHRRADS
esln
nsle
emodif,all

!-----------------------------------------------------------! Apply struct boundary conditions on element type I
! Constrain all translation DOF (the "free" DOF)
! Reapply velocity as displacement on inner nodes in radial
dir. (ux)
! Apply FSI (fluid-struct interface) flag to active

!-----------------------------------------------------------d,all,uy
d,all,ux
nsel,s,loc,x,SPHRRADS
d,all,ux,0,-VELOCITY/(2*PJ*FREQUENC)
sf,all,fsi

!-----------------------------------------------------------! Mesh Infinite fluid domain

! Instead of meshing, use ESURF to generate elements on
1------------------------------------------------------------

existing mesh

type,3
real,3
mat,3
esel,all
nsel,s,loc,x,INFlRADS,fNFl RADS+TOLER
esurf,all
allsel,all
finish

!-----------------------------------------------------------! solution options
! Full harmonic analysis

! frequency at FREQUENC
! select everything & solve
!-----------------------------------------------------------/solu
antype,harm
hropt,fu ll
hrout,on
lumpm,0
eqslv,sparse
harfrq,FREQUENC
nsubst,
Summary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities
November 23, 2010

Page 108

kbc,0
allsel,all
solve
finish

!-----------------------------------------------------------! postprocessing w/ annotations
! Load real (set, I , I, 1,0) and plot pressure
! Load imag (set, 1, 1, 1, I) and plot pressure
l do a load case comb. to SRSS for pressure magnitude
!-----------------------------------------------------------/post)
/tsp,,0.75
/ann,delc
/tla,-.90,.90,Plot of real part of pressure
/dscale, l ,o1T
set, l,1,1,0
plnsol,pres
/tsp,,0.75
/ann,dele
/tla,-.90,.90,Plot of imag part of pressure
set, I , 1,1, l
/replot
/tsp,,0.75
/ann,dele
/tla,-.90,.90,Plot of magnitude of pressure
lcdef, 1, 1, 1,0
lcoper,srss, 1
/replot

!-----------------------------------------------------------! path operations
!-----------------------------------------------------------csys,0
lsel,s,loc,x,0
nsll,s,1
•get,NCOUNT,node,,count
csys,1
nsel,s,loc,x,SPHRRADS
nsel,r,loc,y,90,90+'f OLER
STRTNODE=ndnext(0)
nsel,s,loc,x,INFIRADS,INFIRADS+TOLER
nsel,r,loc,y,90,90+TOLER
FININODE=ndnext(0)
Summary Report on BA/\SS UAP Analysis Capabilities
November 23, 2010

Page 109

allsel,all
path,RADIAL,2,30,(NCOUNT-1)
ppath,1,STRTNODE
ppath,2,FININODE
avprin,0,0,
set, 1, 1, 1,0
pdef,REALPRES,pres,,noavg
set,1, 1, 1, 1
pdef,IMAGPRES,pres,,noavg
paget,tracpoin,poin
paget,tracdata,tabl
paget,traclabl,labe
*dim,RADSPATH,table,NCOUNT,7
*do,ICOUNT, l ,NCOUNT
WAVENUMB=2*Pl*FREQUENC/WATRSONC
CURRRADS=TRACDATA(ICOUNT,2, 1)
TEMPAMPL=WATRDENS*WATRSONC*VELOCITY*WAVENUMB*(SPHRRADS**2)/CURRRA
DS
TEMPAMPL=TEMPAMPL/(1 +(WAVENUMB*SPHRRADS)**2)
TEMPAMRC=WAVENUMB"'SPHRRADS•cos(WAVENUMB"'(CURRRADS-SPHRRADS))
TEMPAMRS=sin(WAVENUMB*(CURRRADS-SPHRRADS))
TEMPAMJC=cos(WAVENUMB"'(CURRRADS-SPHRRADS))
TEMPAMIS=-WAVENUMB*SPHRRADS*sin(WAVENUMB*(CURRRADS-SPHRRADS))
RADSPATH(JCOUNT, 1)=TRACDATA(ICOUNT,2, 1)
RADSPATH(ICOUNT,2)=TRACDATA(ICOUNT,5, l)
RADSPATH(ICOUNT,3)=TEMPAMPL*(TEMPAMRC+TEMPAMRS)
RADSPATH(JCOUNT,4)=TRACDATA(ICOUNT,6,1)
RADSPATH(ICOUNT,S)=TEMPAMPL*(TEMPAMIC+TEMPAMIS)
RADSPATH(ICOUNT,6)=sqrt(TRACDATA(ICOUNT,5, l)**2+TRACDATA(ICOUNT,6, 1)**
2)

TEMP I =TEMPAMPL"'(TEMPAMRC+TEMPAMRS)
TEMP2 =TEMPAMPL*(TEMPAMIC+TEMPAMIS)
RADSPATH(ICOUNT,7)=sqrt(TEMP1 "'*2+TEMP2**2)
*enddo
/gcolumn,1,ANSYS
/gcolurnn,2,Theory
/axlab,x,Radial Distance (m)
/axlab,y,Real Pressure (Pa)
*vplot,RADSPATH(l , I),RADSPATH( 1,2),3
/axlab,y,lmaginary Pressure (Pa)
Summary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities
November 23, 2010

Page 11 0

*vplot,RADSPATH(t, 1),RADSPATH( 1,4),5
/axlab,y,Magnitude ofPressure (Pa)
*vplot,RADSPATH( 1,1),RADSPATH(1,6),7

Summary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities
November 23, 2010

Page 111

UAP ANSYS Multiphysics RCS Input File Example
/batch,list
/title, RCS of a Dielectric-coated Metallic Sphere for 300 MHZ UHF
/com, Problem: A metallic sphere (radius=5.0m) coated by dielectric layer
/com,

(thickness=l.0m, Er=4)

/com,

Incident Wave: -x polirazation with PHI = 0 (degree), THETA = 0 (degree)

/nopr
/prep7

I problem dimensions and set-up

freq=300e6
lambda=3 .e8/freq
epsr=4
wave 1=lambda/sqrt(epsr)
wave2=lambda
hl =wave l /25
h2=wave2/25
ra=0.5 *lambda
s=0.01 *lambda
rb=ra+s
a=rb+4*h2
b=a+3*h2
c=b+4*h2

! --- define elements and materials --­
et, 1,HF 119, 1
Summary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities
November 23, 20 10

Page 112

et,2,HF 119, 1,,, I
mp,murx, I, I.
mp,perx, l ,epsr
mp,murx,2, 1.
mp,perx,2, 1.

! --- set up the geometry --­
sphcrc,ra,rb,O,180
sphere,rb,a,O, 180
vsel,all
cm,vequi,volu
block,-b,b,O,b,-b,b
block,-c,c,O,c,-c,c
vsbv,4,3,,delete,keep
vsbv,3,vequi,,dclctc,kecp
csys,2
vsel,s,loc,x,O,ra/2
vdel,all
alls
csys,O
vglue,all

! --- meshing --­

csys,O
smrtsize,4
! meshing
esize,hl
Summary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities
November 23, 2010

Page 113

type, I
mat,1
vmesh,I
mat,2
esize,h2
vmesh,3
esize,h2
vmesh,6

! --- PML element --­
type,2
vmesh,5
alls
nummrg,all

! define equivalent source surface
csys,2
nsel,s,loc,x,O,a
esln,s, I ,all
nsel,s,loc,x,a
sf,all,mxwf
alls

! define boundary condition
csys,O
nsel,s,loc,x,c
nsel,a,loc,x,-c
Summary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities
November 23, 2010

Page 114

nsel,a,loc,y,c
nsel,a,loc,z,-c
nsel,a,loc,z,c
d,all,ax,O.
nsel,all
csys,2
nsel,s,loc,x,ra
d,all,ax,O.
csys,0
allsel,all
! incident plane wave

plwave,-1,0,0,0,0
fini
/solu
hfscat,scat
eqslv,sparse
antype,harmic
harfrq,freq
solve
fini
/postl
set, 1, 1
hfsym,,,pmc
prfar,rcsn,total,0,0,,0, 180,36
/yrange,-35, 15
plfar,rcsn,total,0,0,,0, 180,180
fini
Summary Report on B/\J\SS UAP Analysis Capabilities
November 23, 2010

Page 115

ATTACHMENT II - "TIC TAC" CFD CONTOUR PLOTS FOR PRESSURE,
TEM PERATURE AND MACH NUMBER
11-..00S
1.0Dlw1003

U7let002
.,.8IOe+002

144eet002
5.231et002

Figure 65. Tic Tac Pressure at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 100 mph with Subsonic Inlet and
Subsonic Outlet

U40et002
UlletOD2

2.Dlee1J02
2..231..00Z
2.231e+002
2..236et-002

Figure 66. Tic Tac Temperature at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 100 mph with Subsonic Inlet and
Subsonic Outlet

Summary Report on BAASS lJAP Analysis Capabi lities
November 23, 2010

Page 116

...
,''...., ,
1.Mle001
12Ue001
1.1.eoe-oo1
6.22
51868
4 .150e-OO
3.1149-00
%078e
1.041e-00
4928e-00
Figure 67. Tic Tac Mach Number at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 100 mph with Subsonic Inlet
and Subsonic Outlet
.......
4.717..ooa
3.1'84e•003
3~
2.732e+003
2.215et003
Figure 68. Tic Tac Pressure at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 200 mph with Subsonic Inlet and
Subsonic Outlet
Summary Report on BA.ASS UAP Analysis Capabilities
November 23,2010
Page I 17

Ulla
t.211511
2.282ot002
2.25la+002
22559+002
2.252e.ao2
Figure 69. Tic Tac Temperature at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 200 mph with Subsonic Inlet and
Subsonic Outlet
3.3141001
11Me-lD1
2.944o-001
2.TMe-401
2 5238-001
2.313HN>1
1"'31-00
t .R3~111
1.472•-00
1.262e-OO
1.052e-001
8A17a-002
6.3159-002
4 213e 002
2.111~2
9 187c-005
Figure 70. Tic Tac Mach Number at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 200 mph with Subsonic Inlet
and Subsonic Outlet
Summary Report on BA/\SS UAP Analysis Capabilities
November 23. 2010
Page 118

11••·
1.o'llatGCM
U1,e.cm
7.tnet003
1Ane+oo3
S.252et003
Figure 71 . Tic Tac Pressure at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 300 mph w ith Subsonic Inlet and
Subsonic Outlet
Figure 72. Tic Tac Temperature at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 300 mph with Subsonic Inlet and
Subsonic Outlet
Summar) Report on BAA<.;<.; llAP Anal~ si, Capahilitics
November 21. 20 I 0
Page I 19

l.171.oo1
t.1411001
... .,oo,
4.201.-1
3.171e-001
3.~ 1
2-.00
2.511100
2293e00
1.94Oe-0O
1 617e-001
1.29'e-001
t .70le-002
e,11e.ooi
3.246e-002
1 557o-oo.4
J
Figure 73. Tic Tac Mach Number at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 300 mph with Subsonic Inlet
and Subsonic Outlet
Figure 74. Tic Tac Pressure at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 400 mph with Mixed Inlet and
Subsonic Outlet
Summary Report on BA \SS llJ\P Anal) sis Capabilities
No,·cmbcr 23, 20 I0
Page 120

2.~
2330e+002
2.317et002

Figure 75. Tic Tac Temperature at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 400 mph with Mixed Inlet and
Subsonic Outlet

U37e-001

IAOle001
l ,tae,,001

5.~1
5.12le-001
4.701..«11

3Mle-OO
3411e-OO

2 992• 00
2.565e-001
2 138e-001

•'ii
1.213e-00

4.2th-OO
2 020c.004

Figure 76. Tic Tac Mach Number al 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 400 mph with Mixed Inlet and
Subsonic Outlet
Summary Report on I1A I\SS l lAP Anal) si-; Capabilitic~
November 23. 20 10

Page 121

ai149,,004
s.oDa·OCM
2.71...ocM
2.354et004
1 •1•004
1125et004
Figure 77. Tic Tac Pressure at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 500 mph with Mixed Inlet and
Subsonic Outlet
[Kl
Figure 78. Tic Tac Temperature at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 500 mph with Mixed Inlet and
Subsonic Outlet
Summary Report on B/\/\SS t 1 •\P Anal) si, ('apahi lities
November 23, 2010
Page 12?

........
U111-tD1
1.1111001
1.2lle-001
l .734e-001
~ -
l .173e-001
- - - - -s~l
5.051e00
....90e-OO
3929c 00
3.368e-001
2807e.001
-
~03h-004
Figure 79. Tic Tac Mach Number at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 500 mph with Mixed Inlet and
Subsonic Outlet
Figure 80. Tic Tac Pressure at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 900 mph with Supersonic Inlet and
Supersonic Outlet
Summary Report on BAASS l AP l\nal) sis Capabilities
November 23. 2010
Page 1:n

Figure 81 . Tic Tac Temperature at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 900 mph with Supersonic Inlet
and Supersonic Outlet
1 I01UODO
t.222etGDO
11-.000
1.Glle+OOO
t .77Se-001
,------,-----------------------~- l .182e-«l1
Figure 82. Tic Tac Mach Number at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 900 mph with Supersonic Inlet
and Supersonic Outlet
Summary Report on DA/\SS UAP t\nalysis Capahilitics
November 23. 20 I 0
Page 124

Figure 83. Tic Tac Pressure at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 1100 mph with Supersonic Inlet and
Supersonic Outlet
U10etOII
am,·om
3.211..00Z
3.1811t002
3111..00Z
3037e.oo2
Figure 84. Tic Tac Temperature at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 1100 mph with Supersonic Inlet
and Supersonic Outlet
Summary Report on BAA<;S U,\P Anal) 5is Capabilities
No,cmhcr 21. 2010
Page 125

1•1
1--.
1AOII.OOO
1 305e•OOO
1.205e+000
Figure 85. Tic Tac Mach Number at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 1100 rmph with Supersonic Inlet
and Supersonic Outlet
UOOetGOI
2.30let005
2.1138+005
1..l20et005
Figure 86. Tic Tac Pressure at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 1300 mph with Supersonic Inlet and
Supersonic Outlet
$ummm) Report on f3AJ\SS UAP Anal) sis Capabilities
No, cmbcr 23, 2010
Page 126

Figure 87. Tic Tac Temperature at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 1300 mph with Supersonic Inlet
and Supersonic Outlet

1.I01eta

1.111111000
1.......,
tMle..a
142'o+OOO
130let000

Figure 88. Tic Tac Mach Number at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 1300 mph with Supersonic Inlet
and Supersonic Outlet

Summai) Report on BJ\J\SS l AP Analysis Capabilities
November 23. 20 I0

Page 127

ATTACHMENT Ill - RIGHT CIRCULAR CYLINDER CFO CONTOUR PLOTS FOR
PRESSURE, TEMPERATURE A D MACH UMBER
.....
?.4Zt..oo2
S.71....oo2
. . .,..oo2
40Dle+002
3154e.o02
Figure 89. Cylinder Pressure at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 100 mph with Subsonic Inlet and
Subsonic Outlet
2.237et002
2.237..00Z
2.238e. .
Figure 90. Cylinder Temperature at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 100 mph with Subsonic Inlet
and Subsonic Outlet
Summary Report on BAASS UAP Anal) si<; Capabilities
November 23. 2010
Page 128

1~
t.501....
1AGle001
1.30le-001
1205e401
1.105e-G01

Figure 91 . Cylinder Mach Number at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 100 mph with Subsonic Inlet
and Subsonic Outlet

Figure 92. Cylinder Pressure at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 200 mph with Subsonic Inlet and
Subsonic Outlet

Summary Report on BAAS~ l AP Analysis Capabilities
November 21,20 10

Page 129

Figure 93. Cylinder Temperature at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 200 mph with Subsonic Inlet
and Subsonic Outlet

Figure 94. Cylinder Mach Number at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 200 mph with Subsonic Inlet
and Subsonic Outlet

Summary Report on HAASS llAP Analysis Capabilities
November 23. 20 10

Page 130

u ....
.
7.41let003
~
5.791e+003
492te+003
40Net003
Figure 95. Cylinder Pressure at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 300 mph with Subsonic Inlet and
Subsonic Outlet
Figure 96. Cylinder Temperature at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 300 mph with Subsonic Inlet
and Subsonic Outlet
Summary Rcrort on BA/\SS lJAP /\nal)sis Cupahilities
November 23. 20 I 0
Page 131

4.ea.G01
4.~
4.024•001
3.714■-001
Figure 97. Cylinder Mach Number at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 300 mph with Subsonic Inlet
and Subsonic Outlet
Figure 98 Cylinder Pressure at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 400 mph with Subsonic inlet and
Subsonic Outlet
Summary Report on BAAS<; l IAP Analysi<; Capahilities
November 23. 2010
Page f '.Q

Figure 99. Cylinder Temperature at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 400 mph with Subsonic Inlet
and Subsonic Outlet

Figure 100. Cylinder Mach Number at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 400 mph with Subsonic Inlet
and Subsonic Outlet

Summary Report on BJ\J\SS lJAP J\nalysi<; Capabilities
November 23. 20 I 0

Page 111

a,,..,. .
2.111,,. .
U18et004
2.07letOOI
1,m,,004
19NetOCM

(Pa)

Figure 101 . Cylinder Pressure at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 500 mph with Mixed Inlet and
Subsonic Outlet

.......
2.411..aDI
2Anet002

2.414etG02
2.3lle+002
2.317et002

Figure 102. Cylinder Temperature at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 500 mph with Mixed Inlet and
Subsonic Outlet

Summary Report on BAI\ ~S ll/\P Analysis Capabilitics
November 23. :?010

Page 13-1

a.1-...
ra:ID'I
1.-.401
l.llle-m1
I01194)1
1572e-001
Figure 103. Cylinder Mach Number at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 500 mph with Mixed Inlet and
Subsonic Outlet
Figure 104. Cylinder Pressure at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 700 mph with Mixed Inlet and
Supersonic Outlet
Summary Report on BAAS<:; l AP /\nal)si-; Capabilities
November 23. 2010
Page 115

Figure 105. Cylinder Pressure at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 900 mph with Supersonic Inlet
and Supersonic Outlet

U11etOD2
2.111u 0 DDI
U14et002
2..lllet002

2.11...a
2.717et002

Figure 106. Cylinder Temperature at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 900 mph with Supersonic Inlet
and Supersonic Outlet

Summat) Report on BAA~~ l J\P Anal)sis Capabilities
November 23. 2010

Page 116

1aot•·­
t.tnetoao
1~
1.~
t .77le-001
1.ISle-001
l .515e-001
, 701•--00
4'.886e-00t
4 072e-001
sii
t•.•
8.1
1 OOOe-01$
Figure 107. Cylinder Mach Number at 1/6 Scale, A ir Temperature 223K and 900 mph with Supersonic
Inlet and Supersonic Outlet
.....
..........
,.,
tJJ••·
1078e.ao5
101h+004
l.150etOCM
Figure 108. Cylinder Pressure at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 1100 mph with Supersonic Inlet
and Supersonic Outlet
Summar) Report on BAASS UAP /\nulysis Cup.ibilitics
November 23. 201 0
Page 117

Figure 109 . Cylinder Temperature at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 1100 mph with Supersonic
Inlet and Supersonic Outlet

1.11111000
1....., .
13'4e+OOO
1.2Me+OOO
1195e+OOO

..,,

Figure 110. Cylinder Mach Number at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 1100 mph with Supersonic
Inlet and Supersonic Outlet

Summary Report on BA/\SS lJAP Analysi<; Capabilities
Nuvcmhcr23. 20 10

Page 118

Figure 111. Cylinder Pressure at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 1300 mph with Supersonic Inlet
and Supersonic Outlet
Ult..oGllt
U'll1 1 0DI
3.857e+002
3.555e•002
3A63e•om
3350et002
Figure 112. Cylinder Temperature al 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 1300 mph with Supersonic
Inlet and Supersonic Outlet
Summary Report on HAASS \!AP Anal)si, Capabi lities
November 23. 2010
Page 139

1 •1t000
1.711..000
1.MtltOOO
1.531e+OOO
1'4139+000
1.296e+OOO
Figure 113. Cylinder Mach Number at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 1300 mph with Supersonic
Inlet and Supersonic Outlet
Summary Report on B/\/\SS ll/\P Analysis Capabilities
November 23. 2010
Page 140