Black objects, no radar trace: Mystery flyers spook British jets

The RAF reported two unidentified objects during separate North Sea encounters in February. Both were seen by military pilots, but neither appeared on radar. That combination made the incidents significant because the objects came close to active aircraft and remained unidentified.

On February 18, an RAF Voyager tanker was refuelling a Typhoon off Cromer, Norfolk, at 17,000 feet. Its pilot saw a small, black object travel east to west directly overhead. It passed about 100 to 150 feet above the tanker. On February 23, a Typhoon pilot training off Humberside saw a black, circular object near his aircraft.

The second object was described as similar in size to a car tyre. It passed about 300 feet above the Typhoon at roughly 12,000 to 12,500 feet. The first pilot instinctively ducked because of the object's closeness. The second report was referred to North Yorkshire Police.

Radar is a surveillance system that sends out radio waves and listens for returning signals. Those echoes can indicate an object's position, distance, direction, and sometimes movement. Air traffic and military controllers use radar pictures to monitor aircraft and other targets.

A “no radar trace” means the radar system did not show a detectable return from the object at that time. In these incidents, the RAF pilots reported seeing objects, while radar controllers said they could not see them on their screens. The first controller received the report during the Voyager encounter, and the second sighting was also reported to radar control.

This does not prove the objects were invisible to every sensor. Radar performance depends on the object's size, material, shape, distance, angle, and the system being used. The article establishes only that neither object was detected by the relevant radar systems. Their identities therefore remained unknown.

The first encounter occurred at 17,000 feet, with the object only 100 to 150 feet above the Voyager tanker. The second happened at about 12,000 to 12,500 feet, where the object passed roughly 300 feet above a Typhoon. These were close approaches involving fast-moving military aircraft.

The article describes both objects as flying higher than typical civilian drones. It does not provide a standard civilian-drone operating altitude or a specific legal ceiling. Therefore, the safest comparison is qualitative: the reported objects were operating unusually high for ordinary civilian drones, according to the source.

Their height and closeness increased the concern. At 17,000 feet, the first object was directly over a tanker conducting refuelling. The pilot instinctively ducked. The second object appeared during simulated dogfight training. Neither was visible on radar, making it harder for controllers to warn crews or identify a possible hazard.

The article identifies two normal military activities behind the flights. In the first incident, an RAF Voyager tanker was refuelling a Typhoon fighter jet off Cromer, Norfolk. In the second, an RAF Typhoon pilot was taking part in simulated dogfight training off Humberside.

A tanker supports fighter operations by transferring fuel in the air, allowing a fighter to remain on task without landing. A fighter training exercise helps pilots practise manoeuvres and combat procedures. These explanations come from established aviation knowledge; the article itself gives only the refuelling and training details.

The missions also created busy and sensitive situations. The Voyager and Typhoon were flying together during the first encounter, with the unidentified object passing close overhead. During the second, the Typhoon was manoeuvring in training when another object passed about 300 feet above it. Both events therefore occurred around active RAF operations.

An unidentified object near a military aircraft creates an immediate collision risk. That risk is especially serious during aerial refuelling, when aircraft must maintain carefully controlled positions. It also matters during fighter training, when pilots are focused on manoeuvres and may have less time to react.

The first object passed only 100 to 150 feet above the Voyager, and its pilot instinctively ducked. The second passed about 300 feet above a Typhoon during simulated dogfight training. Neither object appeared on radar. Those facts could make warning, avoidance, and identification more difficult for pilots and controllers.

The incidents also raise national-security concerns because the objects could represent surveillance activity. The source connects the reports with fears of potential Russian drone surveillance in Europe, but it does not establish who operated them. Their actual identity and purpose remained unknown, while the RAF reports were reviewed by The Telegraph.

Radar and human vision detect different things. A pilot can see a dark object against the sky, while radar needs a usable radio reflection or another detectable signal. A small target may return too little energy, especially if it is distant or viewed from an unfavourable angle.

Possible technical factors include the object's size, shape, material, and orientation. Radar clutter, limited coverage, processing settings, or interference can also hide a weak return. Weather, lighting, haze, and the pilot's viewing position may affect visual detection. These are established possibilities, not explanations confirmed by this article.

The reports show only the outcome. The Voyager pilot saw a small black object at 17,000 feet, and the Typhoon pilot saw a circular object at 12,000 to 12,500 feet. Controllers could not see either object on radar. No technical analysis or environmental cause is provided, so the reason for the mismatch remains unresolved.

Modern airspace surveillance uses several information sources rather than relying on one system. Radar provides tracks and positions. Pilots provide direct visual observations and unusual-flight reports. Other systems can include infrared cameras, electronic sensors, and communications or identification signals. This broader approach helps operators compare evidence.

The incidents show how the pieces interact. During the Voyager encounter, the pilot told an RAF radar controller about a small black object, but the controller could not see it on radar. During the Typhoon sighting, the pilot also reported the object to radar control, which referred the incident to North Yorkshire Police. Human reports triggered further attention.

The article does not say which additional sensors were used, or whether either object was later identified. It does show a current limitation: a visual sighting can remain unresolved when radar provides no matching track. Combining reports and sensors may improve future detection, warning, and attribution, but these cases remained unexplained.