Hank echos the conclusion I’ve come to in the past year or two.
It’s a hellfire kinetic, it isn’t meant to explode.
This dude is a total hack. He definitely intelligent enough to know the arguments he’s making are 100% bullshit. I think this guy, whoever he is, is an actual, real-life example of a paid shill. He follows the playbook, mocking tone, never directly examining the claims he’s making with the video as direct context.
A mid-frame non-lens flare camera artifact on a military equipment is how he explains the way that the line of three objects behaves?? HA. Totally absurd. A balloon? Get fucking real.
The claim that the three objects in the Yemen MQ-9 footage are “camera artifacts” or “balloon debris” is physically impossible upon frame-by-frame analysis:
The “Recovery” Phase: If these were digital “ghosts” or rolling shutter artifacts, they would be mathematically tied to the main object’s movement. Instead, you see them tumble individually post-strike before “snapping” into a perfect linear formation. A sensor glitch doesn’t move from chaos back into order.
Zero Altitude Drop: Watch the fragments after the impact. They don’t follow a ballistic arc toward the water (9.8 , m/s^2). They maintain their exact altitude and continue forward. This requires active propulsion/lift; “dead” debris from a balloon or a shattered drone cannot maintain a horizontal plane.
Targeting Lock (LRD LASE): The HUD shows “LRD LASE DES” is active. The Reaper is painting a solid mass with a laser. Military targeting sensors are built to reject “clutter” and ghosts. If the system was “hallucinating” triple images, the auto-track would have flickered or failed.
Damage Resistance: The Hellfire visibly tore the main body open (deforming the shape), yet the craft didn’t spiral or lose lift. If it were a balloon, it’s a rag; if it’s a drone, the aerodynamics are gone. The fact that it stays operational while “gutted” proves it doesn’t rely on wings or buoyancy to fly.
Bottom Line: Artifacts don’t tumble, recover, and then perform coordinated station-keeping. This is a modular, propulsion-capable craft that survived a kinetic hit and kept cruising.
Look at the frames immediately after the “pop”. The sub-objects fight the kinetic shock, stabilize, and continue the flight path. That isn’t a lens flare; that’s technology. I’ll say it again, dude is a hack and /or shillHe points out the 3.1/3.2 read out on the bottom right is miles to target. When it gets hit, it jumps to 6.1 as the reticle falls off the target and instead hits the water. If you consider the camera is flying fast and sort of circling the UAP, the motion makes more sense. It does appear to drop like a slow rag. Balloons of this size still have considerable drag on their bodies when deflated because of the scale of these types of aircraft, but still, we have no reasonable sense of scale in the first place. The apparent speed looks much slower with the post-hit wide view and it shows some of the rotational motion from the camera craft.
