>>72421>There's supposed to be a government report released "sometime next month".https://www.dni.gov/files/ODNI/documents/assessments/Prelimary-Assessment-UAP-20210625.pdfThe gist of the report is:
UAPs are real, but as their name suggests, it is not clear what they are, however they do appear to pose some risk to aviators; there are 11 reports of near misses with a UAP. Most incidents involved multiple sensors (radar, infrared, electro-optical, weapon seekers, and visual observation) identifying UAPs, however more information and further analysis is needed to draw further conclusions on the nature of UAPs; as such, more standardized reporting mechanisms have been put in place for the Navy and Air Force to report UAP incidents. There are five potential explanatory categories for UAPs: airborne clutter, natural atmospheric phenomena, USG or U.S. industry developmental programs, foreign adversary systems, and a catchall “other” bin. Of all of the reports received only one was identified with high confidence -- a deflating balloon -- the rest remain unexplained. UAP sightings tended to cluster around US training and testing grounds, but this may be a matter of collection bias in these regions due to there being a concentration of sensors operating in those areas. In 18 incidents, described in 21 reports, observers reported unusual UAP movement patterns or flight characteristics. Some UAP appeared to remain stationary in winds aloft, move against the wind, maneuver abruptly, or move at considerable speed, without discernable means of propulsion. In a small number of cases, military aircraft systems processed radio frequency (RF) energy associated with UAP sightings.
Over all, the largest conclusion that can be drawn is that while most UAPs remain unexplained to some degree, far more data and reports are necessary to be able to draw further conclusions on their nature and behavior.