F-22 Near Miss with Unidentified Object Outside Langley AFB: Drone Incursions Extended Beyond December 2023, as Questions are Raised About USAF Transparency
Written by Kyle Warfel and Christopher Sharp - 24 October 2024
Liberation Times has obtained a U.S. Air Force Safety Center document revealing that in January 2024, an F-22 nearly collided with an ‘unidentified object’ over Joint Base Langley-Eustis, forcing the F-22 to alter its flight path.
The incident followed a series of incursions over the base in December 2023 by what were classified as 'uncrewed aerial systems' (UAS) or drones, though their origin and operators remain unknown.
The document, obtained through a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request, states that on 4 January 2024 over Joint Base Langley-Eustis:
‘F-22; Unidentified object near midair collision, deviation of flight path.’
A United States Air Force (USAF) spokesperson confirmed the incident to Liberation Times, stating:
‘On Jan 4, 2024, a Hazardous Air Traffic Report/Near Mid Air Collision (NMAC) with an unidentified aerial type/small unmanned aerial system (private/civilian owned drone) within the airspace caused deviation of an F-22 flight path.’
Liberation Times inquired whether the Air Force had identified the origin and operator of the alleged drone, to which a spokesperson replied:
‘No, the report did not contain information on the owner/operator of the craft.’
The spokesperson added:
‘The report does not include that level of detail.’
The document confirms that the incursions extended beyond December 2023.
Furthermore, officials may not be forthcoming about possible ongoing incursions.
In a separate email sent weeks later, Liberation Times asked the base whether any further incursions had occurred since December 2023, knowing the USAF had already confirmed the January 2024 incident.
A spokesperson responded:
‘There have not been any recent reports of UAS or UAPs over Langley AFB.’
When pressed for clarification on whether incursions have continued since December 2023, the spokesperson declined to provide a direct answer.
Witness statements obtained by Liberation Times from the base’s 633d Security Forces Squadron reveal that their dronebusters had failed when personnel attempted to engage the so-called drones.
One witness stated that their dronebuster ‘failed to register’ one of the objects, while another was unable to use a dronebuster ‘due to not having a visual’.
Tommy Turner, a member of the Facebook group ‘Drone Pilots of Virginia’ told Liberation Times that the government’s official story was suspect due to the sophisticated drone detection provisions available to the USAF and the use of similar systems at Formula One events:
‘The whole story is suspect. Most military bases and sensitive government facilities have sophisticated drone detection and anti-drone technology.
‘While it might be possible to fly over or onto base it is very likely the drone will be disrupted and if controlled locally, the operator's location pinpointed. If the drone(s) are brought down, the resources available to investigate the origin are vast.
‘There are examples of this type of technology at work at the Las Vegas Formula 1 event.’
Liberation Times found one company, COPTRZ, which was tasked with protecting a Formula One event in the United Kingdom.
On its case study page, the company detailed how it retrieved drone serial numbers, identified the drone models, and detected the individuals operating them. The case study reads:
‘Multiple radiofrequency and optical forms of detection were used to provide a complete solution to all UAVs.
‘The technology was able to retrieve details on the drones’ serial numbers and model. It also located its route, altitude and speed. It was even able to detect the individuals operating them. This allowed them to inform the organisers of any unplanned flight activity.’
This stands in contrast with the Langley incursions which persisted despite the counter UAS technologies available to the USAF, such as dronebusters, which were used unsuccessfully by security forces protecting Joint Base Langley-Eustis in December 2023.
The dronebuster is described by the USAF as a ‘handheld non-kinetic mitigation device that can detect groups of one to five UAS and jam signal between drone and controller.’
Although the USAF claims it does not know the origin or controllers of the ‘drones’, experts in drone technology have raised doubts.
In an interview with Fox News, Brett Velicovich, an advisor to drone tech company Red Cat Holdings, stated, "They should easily be able to know exactly what they are."
Velicovich added:
"There are all kinds of radar systems out there. Each drone has its own fingerprint."
"Saying we don't know what it is, and if we're taking them for their word that they don't know what it is, that speaks to a larger issue that the administration really just got caught with its pants down, and they've failed."
According to Velicovich, if the drones were operated by a foreign adversary testing U.S. defenses, they likely concluded that penetrating restricted airspace is relatively easy.
The case also raises concerns about how the USAF classified the objects as drones rather than Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena (UAP), despite having no information about their origin or operators.
A recent Wall Street Journal report claimed that the Pentagon’s All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office (AARO), which is responsible for investigating UAP, collaborated with the FBI in the investigation.
However, earlier this year, an AARO spokesperson told Liberation Times, ‘AARO has not yet received a report or any information on this incident.’
Beyond public affairs messaging, inconsistencies may also apply to the USAF's classification of UAS without identification of the types of drones, their origin and controllers.
For instance, previously obtained logs regarding the swarms of objects harassing U.S. Navy ships in 2019 reveal that the objects were classified as ‘unmanned aerial systems’.
However, a witness who served aboard the USS Omaha, one of the ships involved in the incidents and tasked with designating the objects, has questioned their classification, telling journalists George Knapp and Jeremy Corbell:
“The classification of UAS is now inappropriate because it was never confirmed.”
In 2022, the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) confirmed to Liberation Times that the USAF did not extend its UAP pilot program. A spokesperson told Liberation Times:
“The U.S. Air Force pilot program mentioned in the preliminary report [released by the UAP Task Force] to Congress ended in the spring of 2021.
“Lessons learned from the pilot were used to improve support provided to the UAPTF and will be used to contribute to the efforts of AARO. If applicable, data gathered in the pilot was provided through command channels to the UAPTF.”
Liberation Times also learned about attempts by the USAF to crack down on officers attempting to cooperate with the UAP Task Force. The source told Liberation Times:
"In one instance, while the UAP Task Force was still the primary UAP interface for DoD, a mid-grade Air Force officer was reprimanded and admonished by their chain of command for reaching out to Task Force members.
“It seemed the Air Force was willing to participate one day, and the next, it executed a complete 180-degree turn."
Currently, it is unknown how many UAP incidents collected by the AARO originate from the USAF or whether the DoD will publish such details.
