USS Nimitz UAP Incident: The Tic-Tac Encounter

What Was the USS Nimitz Strike Group Doing in 2004?

In November 2004, the USS Nimitz Carrier Strike Group was conducting routine pre-deployment training exercises in the Pacific Ocean, roughly 100 miles south-west of San Diego off the Baja California coast. The group included the aircraft carrier USS Nimitz (CVN-68), at the time one of the most powerful warships in the world, along with the Ticonderoga-class guided-missile cruiser USS Princeton (CG-59), which carried the AN/SPY-1 radar system, one of the most capable air-search radars in the US Navy.

The Nimitz Strike Group was in the middle of an intensive training cycle. The pilots of VFA-41 "Black Aces", the squadron from which Commander David Fravor and his wingman flew, were logging hours to maintain combat readiness ahead of their deployment to the Persian Gulf. Nobody was expecting to encounter anything unusual.

What Did USS Princeton's Radar Track Before the Intercept?

What most accounts of the Nimitz incident miss is that the famous 14 November intercept was not a one-off event. Senior Chief Petty Officer Kevin Day, an operations specialist and radar operator aboard USS Princeton, has stated publicly that the ship's AN/SPY-1 radar had been tracking anomalous objects for approximately two weeks before the intercept.

The objects were appearing consistently at extremely high altitude: around 80,000 feet, well above the operational ceiling of any aircraft the US Navy would routinely encounter. They would then descend rapidly to lower altitudes before disappearing from radar. Day described the radar returns as "solid", not the kind of noise or artefact a radar technician might dismiss, and the objects appeared to be over a specific area of ocean, sometimes called the "cap point" or "CAP" by the pilots involved.

Day's 80,000 feet comes from his own later interviews. A DIA investigation of the case, excerpted in BAASS's November 2010 report, gives a lower number. It says the top of the SPY-1 radar's scan volume "would put the AAVs at higher than 60,000 feet", and that they would descend "very rapidly" from "approximately 60,000 feet down to approximately 50 feet in a matter of seconds" (DOW-UAP-D175, p.25). AAV, short for Anomalous Aerial Vehicle, was the DIA writers' term for the objects.

Day has said that he initially assumed the objects were birds or some kind of anomalous atmospheric effect, and that it took several days of repeated contacts before he started taking them seriously. He has also said that he warned the ships in the group about the objects but was not sure anyone knew what to make of the reports. Two weeks of data therefore pre-dated the intercept, and much of that data would later go missing.

What Happened in the Tic-Tac Intercept on 14 November 2004?

On the morning of 14 November, USS Princeton directed two F/A-18F Super Hornets from VFA-41 to investigate the radar contacts. The aircraft were flown by Commander David Fravor and Lieutenant Commander Jim Slaight, each with a weapons systems officer in the rear seat. They were told to proceed to a location where the radar was showing a track, and to investigate.

When Fravor and his section arrived, they saw churning white water on the ocean surface, approximately 50 to 100 feet in diameter, as if something large were disturbing the sea from beneath. Hovering roughly 50 feet above this disturbance was a white, oblong, wingless object. Fravor has described it consistently as looking like a "40-foot Tic-Tac": smooth, white, no visible control surfaces, no exhaust plume, no markings. It was moving erratically, darting left and right above the churned water.

Fravor descended in a left-hand circle to get a closer look, trying to cut off the object. As he spiralled down, the Tic-Tac mirrored his movements: ascending in a counter-clockwise arc. When he turned to intercept it directly, the object accelerated instantaneously toward him, then shot away at extreme speed. Fravor has described the acceleration as unlike anything he had ever seen in 18 years of fighter aviation. There was no build-up, no afterburner glow. It simply ceased to be where it was.

When Fravor returned to the carrier and reported what he had seen, a second section of F/A-18s was scrambled. One of those aircraft, flown by Lieutenant Commander Chad Underwood, was equipped with the AN/ASQ-228 Advanced Targeting Forward-Looking Infrared (ATFLIR) pod. Underwood acquired the object and recorded what would become the FLIR1 video: the most scrutinised UAP footage in history.

Who Saw the Tic-Tac? Navy Pilots and Radar Operators

What distinguishes the Nimitz case from most UAP reports is the number and calibre of the witnesses. These are not anonymous bystanders: they are career military officers and technical specialists trained to identify aircraft and assess threats.

What Does the Nimitz FLIR1 Video Show?

The FLIR1 video is 1 minute 16 seconds of black-and-white thermal camera footage recorded by Lt. Cmdr. Chad Underwood's ATFLIR pod. It shows an oblong object tracked against a grey sky. The camera operator, Underwood's weapons systems officer, can be heard saying "There's a whole fleet of them, look on the SA" (Situation Awareness display), and "Oh my gosh." The object rotates on its axis, maintains a consistent infrared signature, and at the end of the clip suddenly accelerates out of frame.

The video had been in circulation in UAP research circles for years before its official release. In December 2017, the New York Times published it alongside the story of the Pentagon's Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Programme (AATIP). On 27 April 2020, the DoD formally released FLIR1, along with two other Navy videos, GIMBAL and GoFast, stating that the decision was made to "clear up any misconceptions by the public on whether or not the footage that has been circulating was real."

In that same statement, the DoD confirmed the footage "does not reveal any sensitive capabilities or systems, and does not impinge on any subsequent investigations of military air space incursions by unidentified aerial phenomena." The department did not identify what the objects were.

What Could the Tic-Tac UFO Do? Reported Performance

The most telling aspect of the Nimitz encounter is not the footage itself: it is what the witnesses and radar data describe the object doing. Taken together, these reported capabilities represent a performance envelope that no known aircraft, whether US, Russian, or Chinese, can match. Aerospace engineers and defence analysts who have reviewed the case publicly have struggled to offer any conventional explanation.

Look at what these characteristics actually rule out. They rule out all known conventional aircraft. They rule out balloons and weather phenomena. The radar data rules out sensor malfunction: the Princeton's SPY-1 is one of the most reliable air-search radars in existence, and it was recalibrated multiple times before the incident. The consistency of accounts from multiple independent witnesses, across two different ship platforms and four different aircraft, rules out individual misidentification.

Some accounts add one more capability: travel in and out of the ocean, based on the churning water beneath the object. The DIA investigation excerpt argues against it, then for it. Citing a former crew member of the submarine USS Louisville, it reports "no unidentified sonar contacts" and concludes that "it is highly unlikely that an AAV operated below the surface of the ocean" (D175, p.31). Yet one of its key assessments, on the next page, says the object "possibly demonstrated a highly advanced capability to operate undersea completely undetectable by our most advanced sensors" (p.32). The excerpt contradicts itself, and the only sonar evidence it cites found nothing.

Did the Tic-Tac Really Hit Mach 10? What the Pentagon's Contractor Calculated

No instrument ever measured the Tic-Tac's speed. The Mach 10.7 and 75 g figures in the Pentagon's October 2026 release come from a November 2010 report by BAASS, and they are arithmetic on an assumed descent time, not readings from radar or a targeting pod.

The report, "Summary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities", is document DOW-UAP-D175 in the Pentagon's seventh UFO file release, published on 23 October 2026. You can open it from our PURSUE file browser. It reproduces an excerpt from "the report of an investigation conducted by personnel assigned to DIA", then runs BAASS's own numbers. BAASS admits how thin the material was: "Since there was little hard data, most analyses of the incident had to be made using either parametric studies or assumptions based on eye witness testimony" (p.32).

The method is simple division. The radar operator had said the drop from about 60,000 feet took a matter of "seconds", so BAASS worked through times from half a second to 10 seconds, divided the height by each one to get a speed, and divided again to get an acceleration. At five seconds, the report says, "the average velocity of the craft was 12,000 ft/sec (8,182 mph or Mach 10.7)", with a deceleration of "2400 ft/sec² or 75 g" (p.33).

Table 2 shows how much rests on that one guess. At half a second the same sums give 120,000 ft/s and 7,453 g; at 10 seconds they give 6,000 ft/s and 19 g (p.34). A footnote says the Mach numbers use the speed of sound at sea level. Pick a different time and you get a different object.

None of these figures is a measurement. They are one radar operator's "matter of seconds" turned into a table. The same report can't settle the object's length either: BAASS's executive summary says "40 feet in length" (p.11), while the DIA excerpt says "approximately 46 feet" (p.25). The excerpt is also the source of one pilot's description of the surface. Asked whether the object glowed or reflected sunlight, he said "neither, it looked like it had a white candy-coated shell, almost like a white board" (p.28).

BAASS also ran computer airflow models of a Tic-Tac shape and a flat-ended cylinder at 100 to 1,500 mph. The report calls them "a basic demonstration" of its software (p.46). The results are what a textbook would predict: shock waves form as the speed nears that of sound, and the two shapes behave much alike. On the jets, BAASS concludes: "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 jets were not" (p.47).

For scale, the International Space Station orbits at about 17,500 mph, roughly Mach 23 on the same sea-level yardstick, and you can watch it cross the UK on many clear evenings (our ISS passes tonight page has the times). The top row of BAASS's table, 81,818 mph, is a little faster than a Geminid meteor hits the upper atmosphere, at about 35 km/s or 78,000 mph (see our Geminids meteor shower guide). Our page on what you can see in the sky tonight lists what else is up.

What Happened to the Nimitz Radar Data?

Perhaps the most disturbing aspect of the Nimitz case is what happened afterwards. Multiple witnesses have testified that hard drives containing radar data from USS Princeton were confiscated by unknown individuals shortly after the incident. Petty Officer Patrick Hughes has described two men arriving in plain clothes, not in uniform, not officially identified, who removed the hard drives and told the crew not to discuss what had happened.

Gary Voorhis, the radar technician aboard Princeton, has said that data tapes from the ship's Combat Engagement Centre were also taken. Kevin Day has said that his own logs and records from the two-week tracking period seem to have been removed or are no longer accessible. The FLIR1 video itself was apparently circulating on a classified server aboard Nimitz, and Fravor has said that a copy was made and kept private before any official action was taken, which is likely why it survived.

Who ordered the seizure of the data? This remains unknown. The men who arrived on the ship have never been officially identified. No official explanation for the data removal has ever been provided. Luis Elizondo, the former head of AATIP, has said that this kind of post-incident data seizure was not uncommon in cases that AATIP investigated.

Nimitz UFO Evidence: What Is Confirmed and What Is Missing

How Did the Nimitz Tic-Tac Case Become Public?

The Nimitz case sat in near-obscurity for over a decade. Fravor reportedly discussed the encounter informally with colleagues, but it was not widely known outside military circles. The breakthrough came through a combination of the Freedom of Information Act and the work of journalists and UAP researchers who had been quietly gathering testimony from ex-military witnesses.

Why Does the Nimitz UFO Case Matter?

The Nimitz incident is the cornerstone of the modern UAP conversation for a simple reason: it satisfies every criterion a serious investigator could ask for. The witnesses are credible, trained professionals with nothing to gain and careers to lose. The evidence is multi-sensor: radar, optical, infrared. The footage is authenticated by the government itself. The reported performance characteristics are extraordinary enough to defy conventional explanation, but they were observed by multiple people independently.

Before 2017, the mainstream assumption was that UAP reports were either hoaxes, misidentifications, or the domain of fringe enthusiasts. The Nimitz case made it impossible to maintain that position without wilfully ignoring the available evidence. It is also what prompted the US government to formally acknowledge, for the first time in decades, that unidentified objects are operating in restricted airspace, and that they do not know what they are.

David Fravor has said in interviews that he is not making any claims about the origin of what he saw. He is not saying it was alien. He is not saying it was a government black programme. He is saying only what he knows: that he saw something that moved in ways no aircraft he had ever encountered could move, that it appeared to be aware of his presence, and that he has never received an explanation. Twenty years on, neither has anyone else.

Has the Nimitz Tic-Tac Ever Been Explained?

Two decades after the encounter, the fundamental questions remain unanswered. The DoD has never identified the object. No government has claimed the technology. The individuals who confiscated the Princeton's radar data have never been identified. The two weeks of pre-intercept tracking data is gone. The object that appeared at Fravor's CAP point, seemingly having followed the aircraft back, is unexplained.

What the Nimitz case has done is change the conversation. It moved UAPs from the tabloid fringe to the pages of the New York Times and the floor of the US Congress. It gave other military witnesses the confidence to come forward. It led directly to the creation of the All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office (AARO) and legislative requirements for annual UAP reporting to Congress. Whether the Tic-Tac was an advanced adversary drone, a classified US technology, or something else entirely, its existence, and the government's inability or unwillingness to explain it, is now a matter of official record.

You won't out-fly a Tic Tac, but you can spot one

Kit we've reviewed in full

Fravor had a cockpit full of sensors. A good pair of binoculars is the civilian equivalent: enough to catch shape, motion and behaviour long before something crosses overhead.

Best all-rounder

Opticron Adventurer 10×50

★★★★★★★★★★4.7

Wide, bright field of view: good for tracking anything that manoeuvres erratically at speed.

~£84

See price at FLO In stock at FLO Our full review

For distant, faint targets

Celestron SkyMaster Pro 15×70

★★★★★★★★★★4.5

Bigger objectives for anything further off or higher up: more detail than the naked eye ever gives you.

~£229

See price at FLO In stock at FLO Our full review

Browse all our binocular reviews →

Affiliate links: you pay the same price, we earn a small commission that helps keep WatchTheStars free.

Nimitz Tic-Tac Source Documents

The following are the key official and government-authenticated documents relating to the Nimitz incident.