I’m going to start with Mr. Graves. As pilots that you interact with as part of your organization, do you feel adequately trained and briefed on how to handle encounters with UAPs?
No. Right now, military witnesses to UAP have limited options for reporting UAP, but more concerning is that commercial aviation sector has not adapted to the lessons that the military has implemented. The military and Department of Defense has stated that UAP represent a critical aviation safety risk. We have not seen that same language being used in the commercial markets. They are not acknowledging this risk.
Okay. What steps do you think you have to be taken to improve a pilot's UAP reporting, be it military or commercial?
Right now we need a system where pilots can report without fear of losing their jobs. There is a fear that the stigma associated with this topic is going to lead to professional repercussions, either through management or perhaps through their yearly physical check. So having a secure system, reducing the stigma and making this information available through the public is going to reduce the concerns that air crew have.
Could you just give me a little idea that the degree to which reports in the past are not made public right now?
Well, I don't think there has been a proper reporting system to gather those reports and thus not report them. So to answer your question, I think there is a dearth of data due to the fact that the reporting has been limited up to this time.
Could you tell me why you believe -it's kind of to play the devil's advocate- a reason why some of this stuff should not be available to the public?
There's certainly some national security concerns when we use our advanced sensors and our tactical jets to be able to identify these objects. However, there's no reason that the objects themselves would be classified. I would be curious to see how the security classification guideline actually spells out the different nuances of how this topic is classified from the perspective of UAP, not national security.
I'll give you a follow up on that. Assuming that there are reasons why not all this should be made public... this has been around for a long period of time. Can any of the 3 of you think of any reason why anything related to UAPs, say, 15 years and back, should not be immediately made public?
I think one of it is acknowledging a vulnerability, both from a collection and I'll just say a countermeasure perspective, not we haven't cracked for many years.
Even, say 20 years back. Is there any reason why, when you go back that far, things shouldn't be made public?
Unless it shows a specific national security vulnerability as it relates to a weakness in particular defenses.
Okay. Mr. Fravor, the Tic-tac incident that you were engaged occurred in 2004. What kind of reporting took place after that incident?
None. We had a standard debrief where the backseaters went down to our carrier intel center and briefed what had happened, and that was it. No one else talked to us. And I was in the top 20 in the battle group. No one came. That captain was aware, admiral was aware. Nothing was done.
Your commanding officers provide any sort of justification?
No, because I was the commanding officer (smile), the squadron. So no.
Was this incident the only UAP event that you encountered while you were a pilot?
Yes, it was.
Okay. This is for any one of you. Based of of each of your experiences and observations, do you believe UAPs pose a potential threat to our national security?
(fravor asks if Grusch or Graves wants to answer, Grusch invite Fravor to respond)Yes, and here’s why: The technology that we faced was far superior than anything that we had, and you could put that anywhere if you had one. You captured one, you reverse engineered it, you got it to work. You’re talking something can go into space, go someplace, drop down in a matter of seconds, do whatever it wants and leave, and there’s nothing we can do about it. Nothing.
Okay. Either.
Graves: The other you two I would also like to add, from commercial aviation and military aviation perspective, we deal with uncertainty in our operating space as a matter of our professional actions. Identifying friend from foe is very important to us. And so when we have unidentified targets and we continue to ignore those due to a stigma or a fear of what it could be, that’s an opening that our adversaries can take advantage of.
What steps should be taken to better understand and respond to UAP encounters in the interest of national security?
There needs to be a location where this information is centralized for processing, and there needs to be a two way communication loop so the operators on the front end have a feedback and can get best practices on how to process information, what to do and to ensure that their reporting is being listened to. Right now, there is not a lot of back and forth.
Mr. Grusch, in your complaint to the intelligence community, inspector inspector General, you claim that you believe information is being hidden. What kind of information do you think was hidden and do you think it should remain hidden?
Grusch: Yes, I can speak to that very briefly in unclassified manner, as the preponderance in my complaint was classified to the intelligence communities, both material acquisition and exploitation activity, also baselining the UAPs, but not sharing it with intelligence professionals that are actually doing step briefs to pilots, that kind of information.