USCG C-144 Tyndall UAP 1 TIC TAC IR hot 24 April, 2024 — Department of War Video
AARO assesses that this video, whose uploader-defined title is, “USCG C-144 Tyndall UAP 1 TIC TAC IR hot 24 April 2024,” is likely derived from an infrared sensor aboard a U.S.
Incident Overview
In 2024, in the Southeastern United States, the Department of War preserved a sensor video that was declassified and published on May 22, 2026 as part of the second tranche of the Department of War’s Presidential Unsealing and Reporting System for UAP Encounters (PURSUE). These records were identified by AARO in response to a March 6, 2026 request from eight members of the U.S. House of Representatives for potentially UAP-related material; AARO notes that many of the items lack a substantiated chain of custody.
What the government released
AARO assesses that this video, whose uploader-defined title is, “USCG C-144 Tyndall UAP 1 TIC TAC IR hot 24 April 2024,” is likely derived from an infrared sensor aboard a U.S. Coast Guard platform operating in the Southeastern United States in 2024. A user uploaded this video to a classified network in June 2024.
Video Duration: 00:00:48 Video Description: 00:09-00:15: An area of contrast appears from the upper right side of the screen. The sensor does not pan to track the area of contrast, causing it to leave the field-of-view on the left side of the frame. 00:33-00:48: An area of contrast enters the field-of-view from the lower right side of the screen and leaves the field-of-view on the lower left side of the screen. The sensor pans to the left, but is unable to track the area of contrast.
This video description is provided for informational purposes only. Readers should not interpret any part of this description as reflecting an analytical judgment, investigative conclusion, or factual determination regarding the described event’s validity, nature, or significance.
Status of the case
Records released under the PURSUE program are designated unresolved by the All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office, which means the federal government has not concluded the events were anomalous, has not concluded they were conventional, and has not ruled out either possibility. Where AARO has offered a likely source for an item — an infrared sensor aboard a military aircraft, a commercial camera, or a known optical effect — that attribution is the agency’s working assessment rather than a final determination. Conventional candidates such as drones, balloons, flares, satellites, parallax and forced-perspective artifacts, and ordinary aircraft remain on the table for any unresolved case absent better data than a single sensor pass or a witness recollection.