The Nimitz Tic-Tac: A White Object, Three Naval Aviators, and the Encounter That Opened the Modern UAP Era

What happened, in a paragraph.

Between November 10 and 16, 2004, the USS Princeton — a Ticonderoga-class guided-missile cruiser attached to the USS Nimitz carrier strike group operating in a pre-deployment exercise area off Baja California — tracked a series of anomalous radar contacts using its SPY-1B passive electronically scanned array radar. The contacts, internally referred to as "AAVs" (Anomalous Aerial Vehicles), appeared at altitude above 80,000 feet, descended in seconds to near sea level, hovered, and then ascended or accelerated horizontally at velocities the radar operators could not match to any known aircraft. On November 14, the Princeton vectored two F/A-18F Super Hornets from VFA-41, the Black Aces — flown by Commander David Fravor and Lt. Cmdr. Jim Slaight, with their weapons systems officers — to investigate one of the contacts. The pilots arrived at the location and observed both an underwater disturbance (a cross-shaped pattern of churning water) and, above it, a smooth white object approximately 40 feet long, with no wings, no exhaust plume, and no visible means of propulsion, described by Fravor in subsequent testimony as resembling "a Tic-Tac" mint. The object appeared to react to Fravor's approach, briefly mirrored his pattern of descending circles, then accelerated away. Almost simultaneously, the Princeton acquired a new contact at the pilots' designated rejoin point, approximately 60 miles away, less than a minute after the initial encounter. A later sortie that same day — flown by Lt. Cmdr. Chad Underwood and his WSO — recorded the FLIR1 forward-looking infrared video that the public would not see until December 16, 2017, when the New York Times published it alongside reporting on the Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program (AATIP). The radar, visual, and FLIR observations of November 14, 2004 are the most thoroughly multi-sensor-documented UAP encounter in the public record. AARO's Historical Report Volume I in 2024 reviewed the encounter and did not identify a conventional explanation; it remains under continuing analysis.

The documented record.

The Princeton's radar contacts

USS Princeton, a Ticonderoga-class cruiser, was operating in a Combat Air Patrol-supporting role in the SOCAL Operating Area west of San Diego in the days leading up to the Nimitz strike group's pre-deployment training period. The cruiser's SPY-1B radar — a high-power phased-array system designed for fleet air-defense — began detecting tracks the operators initially attributed to system error. The contacts shared several distinctive features: very high reported altitude (80,000+ feet); ability to descend in apparent seconds to low altitude; ability to hover; ability to accelerate from hover to high subsonic or supersonic velocities in periods inconsistent with any known crewed aircraft. The principal radar operator on duty during much of the period, Petty Officer Kevin Day, has subsequently given interviews and testimony about the tracks; his account is consistent with the general operational picture but the original radar tapes have not been fully released. Verified [1]

The November 14 intercept

On November 14, 2004, two Super Hornets from VFA-41 ("Black Aces") were redirected from a routine training mission to intercept one of the AAVs that Princeton was tracking. The flight lead was Commander David Fravor, commanding officer of VFA-41; his wingman was Lt. Cmdr. Jim Slaight. Each F/A-18F was a two-seater (pilot plus weapons systems officer).

On approach to the contact's location, Fravor observed a cross-shaped pattern of churning water below his aircraft, in what was otherwise calm sea state. Above the water, at approximately his own altitude, was a smooth white object Fravor later described as "smooth like an egg or a Tic-Tac" — approximately 40 feet in length, no visible wings, no visible engines, no visible exhaust. Fravor descended toward the object in a clockwise circular pattern; the object appeared to react, mirroring his descent in a counter-clockwise pattern. After roughly two minutes of this maneuvering, the object accelerated and disappeared from visual range. Verified [2]

The Princeton, almost immediately, reacquired a radar contact at the CAP rejoin point assigned to Fravor and Slaight — approximately 60 nautical miles from the encounter location. The reacquisition timing — less than one minute after visual loss — implies a transit speed inconsistent with any known aircraft type, although the radar operators noted the equivalence could also reflect either dropout-and-reacquisition of the original target or detection of a different physical object that had been simultaneously present.

The FLIR1 video

Later on November 14, after the Fravor-Slaight encounter, Lt. Cmdr. Chad Underwood flew with another VFA-41 crew. During this flight, Underwood's Super Hornet's AN/ASQ-228 ATFLIR (Advanced Targeting Forward-Looking Infrared) pod acquired and tracked a target consistent with the earlier descriptions. The footage shows a small oblong shape against the sky; the shape moves with the ATFLIR's tracking system attempting to lock on. At one point in the 76-second clip, the object appears to rapidly accelerate out of the frame. Verified [3]

The video, internally labeled FLIR1, was filed in the encounter records. In 2017 it was released to journalists Helene Cooper, Ralph Blumenthal, and Leslie Kean by sources including Luis Elizondo, who described himself as a former director of AATIP. In September 2019, the U.S. Navy publicly authenticated the video as a Navy recording, confirming it captured an "unidentified aerial phenomenon." [4]

The Fravor testimony

Commander Fravor (subsequently a retired Navy officer) testified before the House Oversight Subcommittee on National Security, the Border, and Foreign Affairs on July 26, 2023. His sworn account of the encounter, given to congressional staff months before in deposition, corresponded closely to his 2017 public account and the operational records that have been released. Verified [5]

The AATIP context

The Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program was a Pentagon office funded approximately $22 million from 2007 to 2012, established at the urging of Senator Harry Reid with support from Senators Daniel Inouye and Ted Stevens. The program's primary external contractor was Bigelow Aerospace Advanced Space Studies. Luis Elizondo has stated that he was responsible for the program in its final years and resigned in 2017 in part over what he described as institutional resistance to UAP investigation. The Pentagon has, at various points, both confirmed AATIP's existence and limited its public characterization. AATIP is the bureaucratic context within which the Nimitz materials were originally collated and analyzed. Verified [6]

The 2017 NYT disclosure

On December 16, 2017, the New York Times published "Glowing Auras and Black Money: The Pentagon's Mysterious U.F.O. Program," co-authored by Cooper, Blumenthal, and Kean. The article disclosed AATIP's existence, included a description of the Nimitz incident, and embedded the FLIR1 video. The article is the bureaucratic and journalistic origin point of the modern UAP era. Verified [7]

The 2024 AARO Historical Report

The Pentagon's All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office (AARO), established as the institutional successor to AATIP, included the Nimitz incident in the scope of its Volume I Historical Report released in March 2024. The report reviewed the encounter and did not identify a conventional explanation. AARO's broader Volume I conclusion — that the office found no evidence supporting claims of recovered extraterrestrial technology — should not be conflated with the specific finding on Nimitz, which remains characterized as unresolved [8]. Claimed

The candidate explanations.

Hypothesis: Non-human technology

Argument: the object's performance characteristics (low-observable, sustained hover, supersonic acceleration without exhaust, transition between high-altitude and sea-level in seconds) exceed any known crewed or uncrewed aircraft technology and are most parsimoniously explained as the operation of technology not of human origin. Has been advanced by Fravor in interviews (though not as a formal claim of certainty), by Elizondo, and by various UFO-focused researchers. Claimed

Limits: The argument from technological superiority is structurally inferential rather than direct. The Navy and DoD have not adopted this conclusion. AARO Volume I explicitly states the office has not found evidence supporting non-human-origin claims for any case under its review.

Hypothesis: Foreign-power black-program technology

Argument: a foreign-power developmental program (most often hypothesized as Russian or Chinese) has produced a low-observable platform with novel propulsion. The unfamiliarity of US military observers reflects the surprise of a classified-elsewhere technology. Claimed

Limits: The capabilities required substantially exceed those any acknowledged foreign-power program possessed in 2004 or has demonstrated since. If such a program existed, the 21-year gap between observation and public characterization is unusually long. The hypothesis is plausibility-preserving but introduces its own evidentiary problems.

Hypothesis: U.S. black-program technology

Argument: the AAVs were U.S. classified-platform tests being operated in the SOCAL OPAR area, and the operational unfamiliarity of the carrier strike group was the result of compartmentation rather than genuine identification failure. Claimed

Limits: If true, the subsequent 20-year disclosure cycle — including formal Pentagon office establishment, congressional hearings, and AARO investigation — would represent an unusual choice for managing a U.S. classified test program. The hypothesis is not impossible but is inconsistent with the bureaucratic behavior actually observed.

Hypothesis: Sensor artifact or misperception

Argument: the radar contacts were artifacts of system error (SPY-1B in an unfamiliar operating mode after a software update); the visual observation was misperception (sunlight glint, weather balloon, atmospheric ducting); the FLIR1 video shows an artifact of the ATFLIR's tracking algorithm rather than a physical object. Claimed

Limits: The multi-sensor consistency — independent radar from Princeton, visual observation from two pilot pairs across two sorties, the ATFLIR footage — makes pure sensor-artifact explanations difficult to maintain. The 2019 Navy authentication of the FLIR1 video specifically as a recording of an unidentified object cuts against the artifact reading. Individual elements of misperception are not implausible; the multi-sensor convergence is harder to reduce.

The unanswered questions.

The original radar tapes and operator logs

The Princeton's SPY-1B radar data for the period has not been fully released. Excerpts and operator accounts exist; the comprehensive raw data, which would allow independent technical reconstruction of the contact tracks, has not been made publicly available. Whether such comprehensive release is possible without compromising radar-system classification is itself an open question.

The other VFA-41 sorties

The November 10–16 incident period involved multiple intercept sorties beyond the Fravor-Slaight and Underwood-McGonigle flights. Some of these were anticlimactic (no visual acquisition); some reportedly involved additional encounters. The complete sortie record has not been comprehensively reconstructed in public material.

What was below the water

Fravor's account included observation of a cross-shaped underwater disturbance below the position where the Tic-Tac hovered. Whether this represented a separate physical phenomenon, what produced it, and whether the Tic-Tac was somehow associated with it, is not addressed in the released material.

The post-2004 retention and analysis chain

Between the encounter in November 2004 and AATIP's formal establishment in 2007, the operational records appear to have been retained but not centrally analyzed. The 2007–2012 AATIP period involved some analysis. The 2012–2017 period is partially documented. The 2017–present AARO/UAP Task Force period is most thoroughly documented. What was done with the Nimitz records in the institutional gaps remains unclear.

The AARO Volume II

AARO's Historical Report Volume II, addressing additional material beyond Volume I's scope, has been described as pending. As of the date of this case file, it has not been published.

Primary material.

• The FLIR1 video (76 seconds, ATFLIR sensor footage from Lt. Cmdr. Underwood's F/A-18F, November 14, 2004). Authenticated by U.S. Navy September 2019. Public release December 2017.
• The November 14, 2004 OPNAV after-action report (partial declassification).
• The Princeton's radar logs for November 10–16, 2004 (excerpts and summaries released; full data not public).
• Fravor's sworn House Oversight subcommittee testimony, July 26, 2023.
• Cooper, Blumenthal, and Kean. "Glowing Auras and Black Money: The Pentagon's Mysterious U.F.O. Program." New York Times, December 16, 2017.
• The ODNI Preliminary Assessment on Unidentified Aerial Phenomena, June 25, 2021. Includes Nimitz within its 144-incident dataset.
• AARO. Report on the Historical Record of U.S. Government Involvement with Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena (UAP), Volume I. Department of Defense, March 2024.

The sequence.

1. November 10, 2004 USS Princeton begins detecting anomalous radar contacts west of San Diego.
2. November 14, 2004 (morning) Fravor-Slaight Super Hornet flight intercepts AAV; visual observation of Tic-Tac-shaped object.
3. November 14, 2004 (later) Underwood-McGonigle flight captures FLIR1 video footage.
4. November 14–16, 2004 Additional sorties; encounters cease.
5. 2004–2007 Records retained but not centrally analyzed.
6. 2007 AATIP established.
7. 2007–2012 AATIP analytical period.
8. 2017 (October) Luis Elizondo resigns from DoD.
9. December 16, 2017 NYT publishes "Glowing Auras and Black Money." FLIR1 video released publicly.
10. September 2019 U.S. Navy authenticates FLIR1 as a Navy recording of an unidentified aerial phenomenon.
11. 2020 UAP Task Force formally established at DoD.
12. June 25, 2021 ODNI Preliminary Assessment delivered to Congress.
13. 2022 AOIMSG established.
14. July 2022 AARO established.
15. July 26, 2023 Fravor testifies before House Oversight subcommittee.
16. March 2024 AARO Historical Report Volume I released. Nimitz remains unresolved.

Cases on this archive that connect.

Planned: the 2015 GIMBAL and GOFAST encounters (USS Theodore Roosevelt strike group; complementary multi-sensor cases); the 2023 Grusch testimony and ICIG complaint; the 2024 AARO Historical Report in full; the Roswell incident as historical contrast. Also planned: a series file on the Wilson-Davis memo and the question of UAP material recovery.

Full bibliography.

1. Day, Kevin. Interview with KLAS-TV and subsequent independent interviews, 2017 onward. Princeton radar operator account.
2. Fravor, David. Interview with the Washington Post, December 2017; subsequent Joe Rogan Experience interview, 2019; House Oversight subcommittee testimony, July 26, 2023.
3. FLIR1 video, 76 seconds, AN/ASQ-228 ATFLIR pod footage, USS Nimitz strike group, November 14, 2004. Authenticated by U.S. Navy, September 2019.
4. Cooper, Helene, Ralph Blumenthal, and Leslie Kean. "Glowing Auras and Black Money: The Pentagon's Mysterious U.F.O. Program." The New York Times, December 16, 2017.
5. Subcommittee on National Security, the Border, and Foreign Affairs, U.S. House Committee on Oversight and Accountability. "Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena: Implications on National Security, Public Safety, and Government Transparency." Hearing transcript, July 26, 2023.
6. Department of Defense statements on the Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program, December 2017 onward.
7. "Glowing Auras..." NYT article, December 16, 2017 (as above).
8. AARO. Report on the Historical Record of U.S. Government Involvement with Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena (UAP), Volume I. Department of Defense, March 2024.
9. Office of the Director of National Intelligence. Preliminary Assessment: Unidentified Aerial Phenomena. June 25, 2021.
10. Kean, Leslie. UFOs: Generals, Pilots, and Government Officials Go on the Record. Three Rivers Press, 2010. Pre-2017 context for the post-2017 era.