The David Fravor Statement for the House Oversight Committee is a 2023 account by retired United States Navy Commander David Fravor concerning Unidentified Aerial Phenomena (UAP). It is significant for its detailed description of the 2004 USS Nimitz UAP encounter, together with Fravor’s views on government oversight.12
Author and setting
Fravor said that in November 2004 he was the Commanding Officer of Strike Fighter Squadron 41 (VFA-41), known as the Black Aces.3 He said that the squadron was attached to Carrier Airwing Eleven and stationed aboard the USS Nimitz (CVN-68).4 He described the carrier group as being at the beginning of a workup cycle for a combat deployment to the Persian Gulf in support of ground forces in Iraq.5
According to Fravor, the carrier group’s at-sea period was scheduled to run from early November to late December 2004. At the time of the encounter, the group had been at sea for roughly two weeks, and he was scheduled to lead a two-versus-two air-to-air training exercise.6 His flight consisted of two F/A-18F aircraft, designated Blue Air and controlled by the USS Princeton (CG-59).7 Fravor described the F/A-18F as a two-seat aircraft, with the pilot in front and the Weapons System Officer in the rear.8 The Red Air role was flown by Marine Fighter Attack Squadron 232 (VMFA-232).9
Account of the encounter
Fravor said that his flight launched from the Nimitz and checked in with the air controller aboard the Princeton. They were told that the exercise had been suspended for real-world tasking and were directed towards a contact west of their Combat Air Patrol point.10 He placed that point roughly 64 kilometres south of the ship.11 As the flight proceeded west, the controller counted down the range, but the aircraft had no radar contact and did not know what they would encounter.12
Fravor said that the controller had been observing the Tic Tac object on the Aegis Combat System for the previous two weeks.13 He described objects seen on that system as descending from above approximately 24,000 metres to approximately 6,000 metres, remaining there for hours, and then returning directly upwards.14 When Fravor’s flight reached approximately 6,000 metres, the controller called “Merge Plot”, indicating that the aircraft’s radar blip was in the same radar resolution cell as the contact.15
The flight then noticed white water in the ocean. Fravor described the weather as clear, with light winds and calm seas and no whitecaps, which made the white water stand out against the ocean.16 He and the other members of the flight saw a small white Tic Tac object moving abruptly over the white water.17 Fravor said that it had no rotors, rotor wash, or visible flight control surfaces such as wings.18
Fravor’s flight began a clockwise turn to observe the object. He and his Weapons System Officer descended to get closer, while the other aircraft remained in high cover to observe both them and the object.19 After approximately 90 degrees of the descending turn, Fravor said that the object shifted its longitudinal axis to align with his aircraft and began a clockwise climbing turn.20
He placed his aircraft at approximately 4,600 metres and the object at approximately 3,700 metres when he manoeuvred to pull his nose onto it.21 At approximately 0.8 kilometres range, with the object just left of his nose, Fravor said that it rapidly accelerated and disappeared in front of the aircraft.22 His wingman, roughly 2,400 metres above him, also lost visual contact with it.23 When the flight turned to investigate the white water, Fravor said that it too had disappeared.24
As the flight turned back towards its Combat Air Patrol point, roughly 97 kilometres to the east, the controller reported that the object had reappeared on the Princeton’s AN/SPY-1 radar at that point.25 Fravor stated that the object had travelled approximately 97 kilometres in less than a minute.26 He considered its performance far superior to that of his new F/A-18F and said that it did not operate according to known aerodynamic principles expected of objects flying in the atmosphere.27
Video and sensor evidence
After returning to the Nimitz, Fravor said that he mentioned the sighting to one of the crews preparing to launch. He stated that this crew later took the approximately 90-second FLIR1 video, which was released by the United States government in 2017.28
Fravor said that the radar tape, which was not included in the released footage, showed jamming of the AN/APG-73 radar in his aircraft.29 He also stated that the targeting-pod video showed that the object did not emit an infrared plume from a normal propulsion system.30
The statement presents Fravor’s account of the encounter as not having been followed by an official investigation. He said that none of his crew were questioned and that tapes were never taken.31 He further said that Jay Stratton did not contact him until 2009 to investigate what he had observed. Fravor identified Stratton as part of the Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program (AATIP), which he said was led by Luis Elizondo out of the Department of Defense (DoD).32
Later contacts and public discussion
Fravor said that years after the encounter he was contacted by Alex Dietrich, the other pilot in his flight. He said Dietrich asked whether he had been contacted about the incident after 2009, and told him that she had been invited to The Pentagon multiple times to discuss the encounter and view other UAP videos.33
He said that Elizondo later left the Pentagon in protest and joined To The Stars Academy with others. Fravor described the organisation as pressing the UAP issue with leading industry experts and United States government officials.34
According to the statement, the 2017 New York Times UAP articles acknowledged that the United States government was examining UAP.35 Fravor considered that those articles removed the stigma associated with the UFO topic and led to the congressional hearing.36 He also considered that they opened a door for the government and the public that could not be closed.
Oversight
Fravor said that increased interest in UAP had led to a whistleblower-protection provision in a recent National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA).37 He expressed concern that elected officials lacked oversight of government activity involving craft believed not to be from this world.38
He distinguished oversight from complete public disclosure, stating that disclosure could undermine national security. Instead, he argued that checks and balances should operate across government work funded by taxpayers.39 Fravor also stated that even unacknowledged waived government programmes had some level of oversight by appropriate committee members in the House and Senate, and considered that work described in whistleblower testimonies should not be exempt from such oversight.
In relation to the Tic Tac object, Fravor considered it superior to anything the United States had at the time, possessed in the present, or was seeking to develop over the following ten or more years.40 He argued that if United States programmes possessed comparable technology, those programmes should be subject to oversight by elected representatives acting in the interests of United States citizens.41