When your Out There editor took a look at this video, I assumed 'hoax.' But then I noticed that none of the usual easily identified signs of an amateur CGI job were present, so I was intrigued enough to send it to one of our video experts, who was intrigued. My conclusion: I still think it's probably CGI, but it is very well done. Our special effects expert is not so sure. This is his reaction:
"It has old style stars and bars on the hull. We do still use them but
usually they are grey. Why our Air force would be so dumb to plant those
on the hull is beyond me. Still the composite work is amazing. Very well done
if it is composite work. Additionally the lighting match is perfect as is the density
of the atmosphere. Not to mention its location when seen again after the car
goes through the underpass. And the tracking is spot on.
"The distortion, despite what others may think, is the compression of the image
for You Tube. I'd like to see the original uncompressed but I'm sure
it would hold up. The camera was having issues with motion blur and frame
rate. Whenever it moves quickly you get a stepped effect from frame rate and
blur. It's how a less expensive camera deals with things.
"The main problem I have with all this is obvious. We don't test top secret
aircraft in day light or near populated areas unless there's an accident.
This thing is huge, too, and would be hard to hide once it landed.
"However, if this is real, we may be looking at a
deliberate attempt to start leaking, which is the way classified
aircraft are sometimes introduced to the public."
"Still, it just looks too good to be true. But that doesn't mean it's not.
Personally it gave me the creeps. Maybe it's a stunt for an upcoming
--Steve Neill. Steve is a special effects and video expert. His website is SNeillFX.com. You can
find more of his work in progress on his blog, SteveNeill.Wordpress.com