Case_Resolution_Eglin_UAP_2.pdf

UNCLASSIFIED 
1 
UNCLASSIFIED 
All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office 
U.S. Department of Defense 
(U) Case: “Eglin UAP”
Case Resolution | 14 October 2023 
(U) Case Essentials
(U) A military pilot reported the object
due to its potential as a flight safety 
hazard and an incursion into a sensitive 
training range  
(U) Location:  Near Eglin Air Force Base,
Florida 
(U) Date:  26 January 2023
(U) Altitude:  16,000 feet
(U) Shape:  Rounded, cone
(U) Reporter:  Military personnel
(U) Sensor:  Electro-optical, infrared,
visual identification, and radar 
(U) Behavior:  No confirmed anomalous
behavior…

UNCLASSIFIED 
2 
UNCLASSIFIED 
“Apollo spacecraft” (see Figure 2).  The pilot visually perceived a heat signature emanating 
from the rounded bottom portion, which they described as “blurry air.”  
•
(U) During AARO’s discussion with the pilot, the pilot stated that they thought they saw a 
vertically oriented engine affixed to the side of the object that was nearly the height of the 
object. This feature is not visible in the two still images taken by the EO/IR sensor, and the 
pilot did not include this description in the initial report.  AARO has no additional data to 
corroborate whether t…

UNCLASSIFIED 
3 
UNCLASSIFIED 
•
(U) The “blurry air” observation could have been a visual misperception due to
environmental conditions and potentially resulted from a tether hanging below the LTA
object or motion-induced image blurring.
(U) Although the pilot described the object as uniformly gray in the visible spectrum (it appears
uniformly black from the viewing angle in the EO image), the magnified infrared image shows 
the object had a strong contrasting signature in the infrared spectrum.  This contrast suggests 
either a temperature/emissivity difference or a reflectivity difference b…

UNCLASSIFIED 
4 
UNCLASSIFIED 
(U) Intelligence Assessment
(U) AARO’s IC partner on this case assesses with high confidence that the object was not
exhibiting anomalous characteristics based on the available data and its reconstruction of the 
event.  Available data included the altitude, geocoordinates of the object, the aircraft viewing 
angle and heading, as well as the sun geometry at the time of the observation. 
•
(U) Based on reconstruction of the event, to include the viewing angle of the EO/IR sensor
that took the zoomed-in image, the sun would have illuminated the bottom hemisphere i…

UNCLASSIFIED 
5 
UNCLASSIFIED 
(U) Figure 1: Comparison of reported UAP (A: Infrared image of reported object, B: Electro-optical image
of reported object, and C: Image of a commercial LTA lighting system) (Photo credit: AARO) 

UNCLASSIFIED 
6 
UNCLASSIFIED 
(U) Figure 2: Pilot’s drawing of the reported object

UNCLASSIFIED 
7 
UNCLASSIFIED 
(U) Figure 3: The below is a visualization of the pilot’s point of view of the object based on the position
and altitudes of the aircraft and object, the look angle of the sensor, and the sun geometry