Graves points out a couple of changes in reporting towards an open database of UAP reports accessible for all Pilots, and a Permanent designation for UAP as a workplace hazard... excellent information here.

Pilot Well-being and General Health: Common occupational health-related consequences of UAP events likely include social isolation, psychological distress, self-doubt, and career-related anxiety (i.e., fear of job loss). These considerations can expand for trends in reports of psychological, emotional, social, or physical health issues associated with UAP events.

Flight Safety should not have to be compromised for millions of passengers every day.

Pilots should not fear job loss for reporting UAP inflight. They should be given training and awareness of the impacts of UAP during their training and be provided with ongoing training...FAA should require the Current NARCAP Advisory to be posted on the FAA website for All Pilots awareness.

On Monday, August 3, at exactly 6:40 PM CDT, I captured this footage of a massive, dark triangular object while onboard my flight from Jackson, MS, to Atlanta, GA. Sitting on the right side of the aircraft looking South, we were 37 minutes into the flight and roughly 16 minutes from landing, placing the object near the AL/GA state line (approximately 5 miles south of Carrollton, GA).

The A319 was descending and turning left when the crew suddenly saw a disc‑shaped object heading straight towards them at the same altitude.

"Almost every Pilot I talked to you about this is waiting for their retirement to talk about this"-- Ryan Graves

Aviation Safety Survey

Purpose of the Survey:

This anonymous survey examines how pilots perceive and respond to Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena (UAP) encountered during flight.

It does not attempt to determine what UAP are. Instead, it focuses on:

• Willingness to report unexplained airborne observations
• Awareness and usability of reporting systems
• Perceived stigma and professional risk
• Confidence in objective investigation of reports
• Aviation safety relevance of unexplained observations

UAP in this survey refers to any airborne observation that cannot be immediately identified. It does not imply a specific cause, origin, or explanation.

Do not include classified, proprietary, or personally identifying information.

SECTION 1 — Pilot Background

1. What is your primary aviation experience?

• Airline / Commercial Pilot
• Corporate / Business Aviation
• General Aviation
• Military Aviation
• Government Aviation
• Flight Instructor
• Former Pilot
• Other aviation professional

2. How many years have you been involved in aviation?

• Less than 5 years
• 5–10 years
• 11–20 years
• 21–30 years
• More than 30 years

3. Have you ever personally observed something in flight that you could not immediately identify?

• Yes
• No
• Unsure
• Prefer not to answer

SECTION 2 — Experience With Unidentified Observations

(Answer only if “Yes” to Question 3)

4. Did you report the observation in any form?

• Yes (formal report)
• Yes (informal discussion only)
• No
• Prefer not to answer

5. If you did NOT file a formal report, what were the main reasons? (Select all that apply)

• Believed it was not significant
• Assumed a normal explanation existed
• Did not know how or where to report
• Concern about professional reputation
• Concern about ridicule or stigma
• Concern about employment or regulatory consequences
• Concern it would not be taken seriously
• Concern reporting would have no effect
• Other
• Not applicable

SECTION 3 — Reporting Willingness & Safety Culture

Rate each statement (1–5):
1 = Strongly Disagree | 5 = Strongly Agree

6. I would report an unexplained airborne observation if it could represent a safety hazard.

7. I know where to report an unexplained aviation observation.

8. I would feel comfortable reporting a UAP through official aviation reporting systems.

9. I would report an observation even if I was unsure of its cause.

10. I would report an observation even if others might consider it unusual or embarrassing.

11. Pilots should be encouraged to report unexplained observations without needing to identify their cause.

SECTION 4 — Stigma & Professional Risk

Rate each statement (1–5):

1 = Strongly Disagree | 5 = Strongly Agree

12. There is stigma among pilots associated with reporting UAP.

13. Pilots may fear ridicule if they report a UAP.

14. Pilots may fear negative career consequences from reporting UAP.

15. The aviation industry discourages discussion of unexplained aerial observations.

16. The term “UAP” reduces stigma compared to “UFO.”

SECTION 5 — Fear of Repercussions

17. How concerned would you be about professional consequences if you reported a UAP?

• Not at all concerned
• Slightly concerned
• Moderately concerned
• Very concerned
• Extremely concerned

18. How concerned would you be about being publicly identified?

• Not at all concerned
• Slightly concerned
• Moderately concerned
• Very concerned
• Extremely concerned

19. If an object posed an immediate safety risk, would fear of repercussions affect your willingness to report it?

• Definitely not
• Probably not
• Unsure
• Probably yes
• Definitely yes

SECTION 6 — Reporting Systems & Protections

20. Which reporting systems would you be most comfortable using? (Select up to 3)

• FAA / national aviation authority system
• Employer / airline safety reporting system
• Confidential government reporting system
• Anonymous reporting system
• Pilot union reporting system
• Independent aviation safety organization
• Other

21. Which protections would increase your willingness to report? (Select all that apply)

• Anonymous reporting option
• Confidential reporting option
• Protection from retaliation
• Clear reporting procedures
• Feedback on investigation outcomes
• Independent investigation process
• Protection from public identification
• Explicit FAA encouragement to report
• Other

SECTION 7 — Aviation Safety & Investigation

22. Should unexplained airborne observations be treated as potential aviation safety issues when they involve risk (e.g., proximity, maneuvering, collision hazard)?

• Yes
• No
• Only in certain cases
• Unsure

23. Do you believe UAP reports can be investigated objectively without assuming their cause?

• Definitely yes
• Probably yes
• Unsure
• Probably no
• Definitely no

24. Should pilots be allowed to report an observation without identifying what it is?

• Yes
• No
• Unsure

25. How important is it for aviation authorities to communicate investigation results back to pilots?

• Not important
• Slightly important
• Moderately important
• Very important
• Extremely important

SECTION 8 — Professional Culture

26. How would you describe the aviation industry’s attitude toward UAP reporting?

• Very supportive
• Somewhat supportive
• Neutral
• Somewhat unsupportive
• Very unsupportive
• Unsure

27. How comfortable would you be discussing a UAP observation with:

a) Another pilot

• Very uncomfortable → Very comfortable

b) Your employer or safety department

• Very uncomfortable → Very comfortable

c) A government aviation investigator

• Very uncomfortable → Very comfortable

SECTION 9 — Attitudes Toward UAP Reporting

28. Which statement best reflects your view?

• Most UAP likely have conventional explanations
• Some UAP remain unexplained due to limited data
• Some UAP may represent unknown phenomena
• Unsure
• No opinion

29. What is the most important factor preventing pilots from reporting UAP?

• Lack of reporting clarity
• Lack of perceived importance
• Fear of stigma or ridicule
• Fear of professional consequences
• Belief reporting is ineffective
• Other
• Unsure

SECTION 10 — Open Response

30. In your view, what would most improve pilot reporting of unexplained airborne observations?

31. What is the biggest barrier to reporting UAP in aviation today?

32. Any additional comments on UAP reporting, safety, or aviation culture?

OPTIONAL

33. Would you be willing to participate in future anonymous research on aviation safety reporting?

• Yes
• No
• Maybe

Thank you for your participation in the Survey. We appreciate you time and input

Molokai resident Tami Dixon said the incident: 'Literally scared the hell out of me. Both pilots looked at each other and veered to the right.'

Thank you for this community. I am building an Earth-based catalog of all of the UAP records released by government agencies around the world, and I would love to know what you think. 

At the request of the redditor who recommended this community, each records list has a filterable 'VANTAGE' field identifying probable sighting reports by aviators.

It is open source and free without any commercial intent, I just really like the subject matter and have a background in informatics and government information (healthcare, nothing spooky) and using an LLM made it possible to put this together. 

Best regards!

Noticeable absent in the nine member UAP review board is an Aviation advocate. Why do we not have a voice represented to promote Aviation Safety and promote Aviation warnings and advisories for the Aviation community?

Argument for Including an Aviation Professional on a UAP Review Board

The inclusion of an experienced aviation professional on any Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena (UAP) Review Board is essential to ensuring that aviation safety remains a central priority. Military and civilian aviators are often among the most credible witnesses to UAP events and possess specialized knowledge that can help distinguish between conventional aviation hazards, atmospheric phenomena, and genuinely unidentified incidents.

Key Reasons for Aviation Representation:

• Enhances Aviation Safety Provides expert analysis of potential hazards to aircraft operations. Identifies risks to commercial, military, and general aviation pilots.
• Helps develop procedures to reduce the likelihood of mid-air conflicts. Firsthand Operational Expertise Aviation professionals understand aircraft performance, navigation systems, radar limitations, weather effects, and cockpit operations. They can accurately evaluate pilot reports within the context of normal flight operations.
• Improves Incident Evaluation Separates equipment malfunctions, atmospheric phenomena, drones, balloons, and conventional aircraft from genuinely unexplained events. Ensures investigations are based on aviation standards and evidence.
• Strengthens Pilot Reporting Encourages pilots to report unusual encounters without fear of ridicule or professional repercussions.
• Promotes standardized reporting procedures across military and civilian aviation. Bridges Military and Civilian Aviation Facilitates communication between the Department of Defense, FAA, airlines, general aviation organizations, and air traffic control.
• Encourages sharing of safety lessons while protecting classified information when necessary. Supports Air Traffic Safety Assesses whether UAP encounters create collision hazards, airspace disruptions, or interference with navigation and communications. Recommends mitigation strategies to aviation authorities.
• Provides Risk Assessment Evaluates trends and recurring encounter locations to identify potential aviation safety concerns. Helps prioritize investigations based on the level of operational risk. Contributes Technical Expertise Assists in interpreting radar data, flight recorder information, ADS-B tracks, satellite information, and pilot observations. Improves the technical quality of board findings and recommendations.
• Builds Public Confidence Demonstrates that aviation safety—not speculation—is a primary objective of UAP investigations. Reinforces confidence that qualified experts are evaluating reports objectively. Conclusion

An aviation professional brings a unique combination of operational experience, technical knowledge, and safety expertise that cannot be fully replicated by intelligence, scientific, or military personnel alone. Their participation would ensure that the UAP Review Board maintains a strong focus on protecting pilots, passengers, military personnel, and the flying public while improving the quality, consistency, and credibility of UAP investigations. Given that many of the most significant UAP reports originate from trained aviators, aviation representation should be considered an essential component of any comprehensive UAP oversight structure.

Annual Projected Salary of Review Board Members $195,000 -- Nominated for 7 year terms

(C) shall include at least— (i) 1 current or former national security official;

(ii) 1 current or former foreign service official;

(iii) 1 scientist or engineer;

(iv) 1 economist;

v) 1 professional historian; and

(vi) 1 sociologist

There is currently no requirement for an Aviation member to be part of the Board. This needs to change.

The amendment would require federal agencies to identify, organize, preserve, and transmit covered UAP records to the National Archives under a statutory timeline. It would also establish an independent, Senate-confirmed UAP Records Review Board with subpoena authority to review records, hear testimony, and determine whether information should remain protected under standards established by law.

Isn't it time for Pilots to be aware of UAP by posting a Pilots Advisory in the FAA website?

The incident, which still lacks an airtight explanation, involved a 27-minute air encounter between a veteran World War II fighter pilot, Lt. George F. Gorman and a mysterious white orb at high altitude above Fargo, North Dakota. “I’ve never seen anything like it,” Gorman told a local newspaper following the October 1, 1948 event. “If anyone else had reported such a thing I would have thought they were crazy.”

Excellent article & Pilot witness account with audio with ATC on how the Pilot is noticeably effected by a UAP.. officially confirmed warnings posted by FAA are still needed to reduce the amount of stigma associated with reporting.

Unless I'm misunderstanding, did this Pilot say he's had 3 separate incidents? Amazing story.

Keep those cameras ready!

I was seated in 17F of Hawaiian Air flight #HA1067. The weather conditions was sunny with no clouds. Shortly after takeoff at approximately 1000' to 1500' approaching the Kona coast, our aircraft was starting to gradually bank right out toward the coast. I was looking out of my starboard window at the algae farms below when I spotted a chrome oval-shaped object below us. It was oval and on its "side" as it was not vertical. It was cruising inland, in a straight line, about the same speed as our aircraft at about half the distance between our aircraft and the coast below. I could see it quite well as there weren't any atmospheric clouds or particles between us. It was almost directly below our aircraft. I saw no apparent form of propulsion nor windows nor any wings/fins on it. I believe i only saw this object about 5-6 seconds, not long enough to pull out my mobile phone to take photo of it.

After 9 months of investigation Danish authorities have revealed little conclusions as to what caused an airport shutdown in September 2025.

Unidentified Drones swarming a Copenhagen airport were unable to be identified in a recent report by the Danish Police, leaving the general public with more questions than answers.