UFO Detection Network

[arowx]

What if UFO enthusiasts set up a detection network using cameras that could watch the sky 24/7?

A camera or set of cameras could be linked to a computer and run software that checks for moving objects.  

And if the network were linked and also had more advanced motorised cameras/telescopes then it could be possible to triangulate and obtain higher resolution images of any UFO's.

How many UFO enthusiasts have a HD webcam they could point at the sky over night, and a computer that could run software to monitor and record the feed?

MUFO has a world map of UFO sightings, what if enthusiasts were to able to bring online an automated UFO skywatch grid in these regions.

Even with basic webcams if you capture a moving object in the sky from two or more cameras then you will be able to triangulate the position of the object, it's speed, size and flight path much more accurately.

I'm sure that within the UFO enthusiast network there are enough geeks, computer programmers and electronics enthusiasts to build up guides on DIY UFO detection systems.

To be honest I'm surprised the UFO community have not set up a global sky watch network already with the proliferation of cheap computing power and high resolution camera systems.  Please correct me if there already is such a global network?

Just thought you could probably use an old smartphone with a camera, then you would just need a skywatcher app and a stand.

What do you think?

[darrenp]

The trouble is it would need to be very cheap and easy to install otherwise very few people would install them and if it was very cheap then would the quality of the pictures have sufficient resolution to be of help? I mean MUFON doesn't really have that many members, few of those members would pay to install a camera so would the aim to be to produce a low cost, low quality option or a high cost, high quality option?

Would it be better to have many very low cost, low quality devices or a few very high quality cameras in UFO hotspots, if there is such a thing? We live in a world where everyone's walking around with high resolution cameras on their phone's and yet the pictures and video we have don't seem to persuade many people, I wonder why that is. Is it that the pictures and video are too low quality? That they're recording the wrong kind of data? Something else?

[tobiasclaren]

It is not really cheap, or?

And a video proof is not a real proof.
opponents could say it is a fake.
OK, with more as one camery in "the hand" (mounted) of more than one owners this would be seriuos material.
But film or fotograph the sky, especially at night is not simple.
"webcams" or smartphones are "blind".
Often the object could be everything, also a plane.

My Idea s a network of gravity (and magnetic) sensors.
Like the G-Sensor chips in smartphones.

In the established science, there is nothing naturally and (known) artificial that could have a effect of the local gravity field of the earth. ~9,81N.
A anomaly would be a hard proof for "impossible" technology.
Alienbased, or at least (for "doubter", "debunker"...) secret military technology (US black budgets, not every country, perhaps only the USA):

mutualufonetwork.proboards.com/thread/1007/distrib-search-anomalies-magnetic-gravity

Cameras like this (or used CCTV etc.) are a good complement for this sensor station.

And a computer is anyway necessary for a camera like this. Or not?
This could be a cheap Raspberry PI ($35).
And a sensor board (Gravitation and Magnetic field) for PI costs only $8 ( www.piborg.org/xloborg/install ).
Im am not a "member", but I would buy and install one or two stations (in Cologne, and ~25km/15,6miles SW from Cologne).
And this hardware could "dual use" as Wifi AP etc..

My second idea is a "network" of people with Telescopes.
Hobby astronomists.
They could align their telescopes every night with automatic tracking (used under $100) to the moon.
But not the full moon, the moon and surrounding space.
With a camera and motion detected recording.

Because of the last lunar eclipse there were many video recordings of the moon.
On a few were "interesting moving dots".

Several cameras simultaneously, many (tens, hundreds ...) miles apart, and local phenomena or video errors are excluded. Because of the angle.
Birds, water drops etc ..
Objects near the moon were to be seen in some videos. But not birds etc..

Many supporters arround the world could observe the moon 24 hours.
We do not need Telescopes with 1 meter lens or mirros or bigger, pictures you can see the "muffler" (like the Stephan Michalak Incident...) of a spacecraft or clear structures.
Evidence of objects with unnatural movement is sufficient.
A group of "points", that moves from or to the moon.
"Points" change their speed.
"Points" change the direction.
Impossible for asteroids etc ..
Perhaps with usual 8" to 20" telescopes.




@ darrenp

"I wonder why that is"

These cameras in smartphones a very small.
In the night absolutely useless, especially to film or photograph the sky.
Perhaps the Note 5 has a better camera as note 3 or 4, but also this UHD cameras are crap for recodings in the night or miles/kilometre far UFOs.
Look the good cumbargaz lake video from turkey: www.youtube.com/watch?v=27Ip7vqqJBE
Allegedly a big professional camera. One of the first digital video cameras for the shoulder, perhaps with resolution under VGA, but with big lens, optical zoom etc..