The Light That Crossed the Camera Five Times: DOW-UAP-PR031 to PR033 Over Eastern Syria (20 October 2024)
Over forty five minutes an aircrew orbiting eastern Syria watched light of unknown origin cross their camera feed five times from different angles. They wrote down that it was not a laser. The Department released three of the five moments.
What did witnesses see at Eastern Syria?
Between 1559 and 1644 Zulu on 20 October 2024, the crew of a United States Air Force special operations reconnaissance aircraft orbiting over eastern Syria recorded five separate intrusions of light into their full motion video feed, from different angles and different directions, while they were working a target development tasking.
The Department of War has published three of those five moments as three separate video records, DOW-UAP-PR031, PR032 and PR033. The manifest cross pairs all three to each other and all three to the same mission report, DoW-UAP-D32, which is the government's own way of saying that these are not three events. They are three fragments of one.
The mission report has been recovered and read. It is a MISREP filed by the 12th Special Operations Squadron, 27th Special Operations Wing, under Air Force Special Operations Command, tasked to United States Central Command in support of Operation INHERENT RESOLVE. The aircraft took off from OJMS, which is Amman Marka in Jordan, at 0823Z on the 20th and did not land back there until 0447Z the following morning, a mission of 20 hours and 24 minutes. Weather: CLEAR WX. Target pod: AN/DAS-4. The observer is recorded as an E-4.
The aircraft was orbiting at 20,088 feet doing 144 knots at grid 37SFU44 when the first light crossed. The object's first and last recorded positions are both 37SFU36, which resolves to approximately 34.66 north 40.48 east: eastern Syria, in the Euphrates valley near Deir ez-Zor, well inside the Inherent Resolve area of operations and roughly ten kilometres from the aircraft's own orbit.
The UAP block records Initial Contact at 201559:00ZOCT24 under event serial number 201559ZOCT2024. Physical state: Plasma. Signature: LIGHT. Propulsion means: UNKNOWN. Under intelligent control: NO. Objects or material recovered: NO. Effects on persons: NO. Observer assessment: Benign.
The description field reads, in full and with the original spelling: "MISHAPEN AND UNEVEN BALL OF WHITE LIGHT." The Department's manifest and its DVIDS records quietly correct that to "misshapen" in all three video summaries. The document says MISHAPEN.
The narrative gives the timeline: "FROM 1559Z-1644Z, [redacted] OBSERVED MULTIPLE GLARES OR LIGHT FROM UNKNOWN ORIGIN AT DIFFERENT ANGLES AND DIRECTIONS. AT 1559Z, 1602Z AND AT 1644Z, OBSERVED 1X LIGHT/GLARE CROSSED DIRECTLY ON THE FMV CAMERA. AT 1609Z AND 1620Z, [redacted] OBSERVED A LIGHT/GLARE HALO EFFECT AT THE TOP OF [redacted] FMV FEED. AIRCREW CONSIDERED THIS NO MISSION IMPACT OR CHANGE AND UAP WAS BENIGN."
So the five moments are three crossings, at 1559Z, 1602Z and 1644Z, and two halo effects, at 1609Z and 1620Z. The three released clips correspond to three of these.
And then the line that makes the record worth a case file at all, from the anomalous characteristics field: "LIGHT/GLARE FROM UNKNOWN ORIGIN FLASHED ACCROSS FMV CAMERA FEED. AIRCREW ASSESSED THIS NOT TO BE A LASING EVENT."
The three clips have been downloaded from the government content delivery network and examined frame by frame. All three are 1920 by 1080 at thirty frames per second and all three show the same thing underneath: a monochrome infrared full motion video view of a walled rural compound with outbuildings and a courtyard, seen from above at a shallow slant, with magenta targeting graphics and the Department's black redaction blocks over the heads up display.
PR031 runs 5.13 seconds and the Department describes an indistinctly shaped multi coloured area moving right to left across the top edge within the first second. PR032 runs 6.6 seconds; the described event falls between two and four seconds, an area of irregular colour and brightness "mainly consisting of white and red highlights" spanning about a third of the frame width, shaped as "a horizontally-oriented half-oval bisected along its major axis". PR033 runs 5.03 seconds and carries the clearest artifact: the Department calls it "two semi-transparent, irregularly shaped orange areas" overlaying the imagery for less than two seconds each.
A frame differencing pass over all three clips located the PR033 event numerically rather than by eye. Measuring per pixel colour saturation against each clip's own median frame, PR031 and PR032 peak at around 130 on that scale over fewer than seventy pixels, which is the level of the magenta targeting graphics themselves. PR033 peaks at 223 over about 2,350 pixels between roughly 1.90 and 2.03 seconds. That is a saturated, spatially extensive colour event on a feed that is otherwise entirely greyscale, and it is what the hero image on this page shows: a solid orange blob with soft edges sitting over the eastern side of the compound, unmistakably not part of the scene and unmistakably not part of the graphics overlay.
More footage and images of this sighting
DoW-UAP-D32, the USCENTCOM mission report for this event, declassified 24 October 2025, carrying the aircrew's finding that it was not a lasing event View source
What is the official explanation?
The three videos were published by the Department of War in the first PURSUE tranche on 8 May 2026 as DOW-UAP-PR031, PR032 and PR033, each titled "Unresolved UAP Report, Syria, October 2024", and mirrored to the Defense Visual Information Distribution Service as records 1006076, 1006078 and 1006079. PURSUE is the Presidential Unsealing and Reporting System for UAP Encounters, established under an executive order signed in January 2026.
All three carry the same Department summary: "The United States Central Command submitted a report of an unidentified anomalous phenomenon (UAP) to the All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office (AARO) consisting of [five, six, five] seconds of video footage from a full-motion video (FMV) camera aboard a U.S. military platform in 2024. An accompanying mission report, DoW-UAP-D32, described the UAP as consisting of a 'misshapen and uneven ball of white light,' and reported that a 'light/glare halo effect' occurred at the top of the FMV feed." Each closes with the Department's standing caveat that the description should not be read as "reflecting an analytical judgment, investigative conclusion, or factual determination".
The pairing columns of the machine readable release manifest are the official answer to whether this is one event or three. For PR031 the Video Pairing field reads "PR-032 | PR-033"; for PR032, "PR-031 | PR-033"; for PR033, "PR-031 | PR-032". All three give a PDF Pairing of DoW-UAP-D32. Across the PURSUE corpus these columns are the Department's own cross reference for records it treats as a single incident, and where it asserts no link it leaves them empty. Here it has linked all three to each other and to one document. One event, one page.
The mission report was classified SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY with an original declassification date of 20 October 2049. It was declassified twenty four years early, on 24 October 2025, by Major General Richard A. Harrison, Chief of Staff of United States Central Command, under mandatory declassification review numbers USCENTCOM MDR 25-0100 through 25-0103 and Joint Staff reference JS-250710-TM8S, and stamped "Approved for Release to AARO" on 28 October 2025. The same declassification action covers the eastern Mediterranean report published as DOW-UAP-PR028, which means a single CENTCOM review batch is the source of several of the corpus's most detailed files.
The redaction pattern follows the rest of the corpus: aircraft type, tail number and callsign withheld under exemption (b)(1)1.4a and 1.4g, personal identifiers under (b)(6), and the supported unit recorded only as DATA MASKED. The operation name, unusually, is not redacted. It reads INHERENT RESOLVE.
What the Department has not done is identify the light. The record is published as unresolved, the All Domain Anomaly Resolution Office has issued no case resolution, and the report itself records that nothing was done to probe the source: "Observation Interrogation of UAP" reads NO and "Observer Engagement of UAP" reads NO. The aircrew logged it, noted no mission impact, and carried on with the tasking. Between the second crossing at 1602Z and the third at 1644Z the same feed was used to conduct a three stop follow on a man on a motorcycle, which is a fair measure of how seriously the crew treated the interruption at the time.
What did the witnesses think it was?
The witnesses are an aircrew, anonymous, and the primary observer is recorded only as an E-4. They are not casual observers of the sky. They spent twenty hours in the air that day across three separate on station periods, running full motion video and signals intelligence collection over a war zone, and the feed they were watching is the instrument they are paid to read.
That is what gives the single most important sentence in this file its weight: "AIRCREW ASSESSED THIS NOT TO BE A LASING EVENT."
Aircrew flying persistent surveillance over Syria in 2024 had a specific and well founded reason to think about lasers first. Ground based laser illumination of aircraft sensors, whether hostile dazzling or an ordinary handheld pointer, is a known and reported hazard in that theatre, it produces exactly this signature of coloured glare washing across an optical feed, and it is the thing a crew is trained to recognise and required to report. So the crew reached for the obvious answer, considered it, and wrote down that it was not that. They did not say what it was instead. They said what it was not, and they were the only people in a position to judge, since they alone saw all five events, knew the geometry of their own orbit, and could see whether the glare behaved as ground originated illumination behaves.
The crew's other entries are as conservative as that one is pointed. Under intelligent control: NO. Advanced capabilities or materials: NO. Effects on equipment: left blank. Assessment: Benign. Mission impact: none. The physical state field is the only place they reached for something exotic, and what they reached for is a real physical category rather than a speculation: Plasma. On a form that offers a field for whether material was recovered, a crew inclined to dramatise had plenty of room and used none of it.
One detail is worth reading as behaviour rather than testimony. This was not a single startling flash. It was five events across forty five minutes, at 1559Z, 1602Z, 1609Z, 1620Z and 1644Z, from different angles and different directions, and the crew kept working through all of them. A crew that had concluded they were being lased would have broken off, changed the orbit and filed a hazard report. A crew that had concluded their camera was faulty would have said so. They filed it as a UAP incident, which was the only remaining honest box on the form.
There are no other witnesses. No third party observers or reporters are recorded, no other aircraft is mentioned, and there is nothing in the file about anybody on the ground, in a region where the aircraft was watching a compound precisely because of who might be in it.
Is the Light That Crossed the Camera Five Times: DOW-UAP-PR031 to PR033 Over Eastern Syria (20 October 2024) real? The two-pass assessment
Pass one: how could this be entirely ordinary, and here the ordinary explanation is strong, specific, and has to lead.
What the released clips show is, on its face, an optical artifact. A saturated orange or white and red patch with soft edges, appearing for under two seconds, overlaying a greyscale infrared scene without disturbing it, is the classic signature of stray light inside an optical train. Sun glint off a canopy, a lens, or the turret's own window; internal reflection between elements; localised detector saturation and bloom from a bright out of band source; all of these produce coloured semi transparent patches on a monochrome sensor feed that come and go as the aircraft's attitude changes relative to the source. The Department's own language for two of the five events, a "halo effect at the top of the FMV feed", is the vocabulary of a lens flare, and the fact that three of the five appeared at or near the top edge of the frame is exactly what you would expect from a source outside the field of view spilling into it.
The orbit strengthens that reading. The aircraft was flying a sustained orbit at 20,088 feet, meaning it presented the turret to every bearing in turn, repeatedly. Late afternoon local time in eastern Syria in October puts the sun low. An orbiting aircraft with a low sun will bring the turret through the same unfavourable geometry once per circuit, which would neatly account for a series of glare events "at different angles and directions" spread across forty five minutes rather than a single continuous phenomenon.
Ground based laser illumination remains a live candidate despite the crew's rejection of it, and the archive will not pretend otherwise. Handheld and vehicle mounted lasers were a documented nuisance to coalition aircraft in that theatre. The crew's assessment is the informed judgement of the only witnesses, which is worth a great deal, but it is a judgement rather than a measurement, no spectral analysis was run, and the report records no attempt to interrogate the source. A dismissal written into a form on the same sortie is not a laboratory result.
One mundane possibility is worth naming because the file itself half concedes it: the crew never claimed to see an object. The description "misshapen and uneven ball of white light" is a description of light, not of a body. The signature field reads LIGHT. The physical state field reads Plasma, which on this form is not an exotic claim so much as an admission that whatever it was had no solid form. Nobody aboard that aircraft reported a craft, a shape, a structure or a trajectory. They reported illumination of unknown origin.
Pass two: what resists. Three things.
The first is the count and the spread. A single flare is nothing. Five discrete events in forty five minutes, from different bearings, of two distinguishable kinds, is a pattern, and the crew who could see the whole pattern found it strange enough to file. It is also the reason the artifact explanation cannot simply be asserted: an internal reflection tends to recur with the same geometry and to look the same each time, and by the Department's own frame descriptions these did not. One moved right to left across the top edge, one was a bisected half oval spanning a third of the frame, one was two separate orange areas overlaying the middle of the scene. The one this page shows sits well inside the frame, over the compound, not at an edge, which is the least flare like of the three.
The second is the crew's rejection of lasing, which cuts in a direction people usually miss. The point is not that they proved a laser was absent. It is that the crew most likely to over report a laser, because a laser is the reportable hazard with paperwork attached and a UAP report in October 2024 was still a career oddity, chose the harder box. The path of least resistance for that aircrew was to log a lasing event and move on.
The third is that this is the government's own camera, on its own aircraft, over its own area of operations, and it declassified the record twenty four years early to publish it. Whatever internal review preceded that decision did not produce the sentence "this was lens flare", which would have been the easiest possible thing to write and would have closed the file.
Weigh honestly against all of it the following. The archive has read the mission report but nobody outside the government has the raw sensor data, the turret model or its settings, the aircraft's exact attitude, or the solar geometry for the airframe at each of the five times. Fourteen of the forty five minutes are not published at all; what exists is sixteen and a half seconds across three clips, re encoded for the web. No spectral information survives compression. No radar was pointed at the source. The crew, who knew more than any reader ever will, assessed it as benign and did not think it worth interrupting a surveillance task. And the two most likely readings, stray light in the optics and something genuinely present in the air, are not distinguishable from sixteen seconds of compressed video by anybody.
The tier is Unknown. There is no official narrative to dispute, because the Department publishes all three records as unresolved and the All Domain Anomaly Resolution Office has offered no finding. Optical artifact is the strongest prosaic reconstruction and this file does not defeat it. But no named analyst has published a method shown demonstration that these specific frames are flare, the one group of people who watched all five events and knew the geometry rejected the leading alternative explanation in writing, and the record stands as what it says it is: light of unknown origin, five times, over eastern Syria, on a United States Air Force camera, unexplained.
Sources
- web.archive.org/web/20260508125533/https://www.war.gov/medialink/ufo/release_1/dow-uap-d32-mission-report%2C-syria-october-2024.pdf
- www.dvidshub.net/video/1006076/dow-uap-pr31-unresolved-uap-report-syria-october-2024
- www.dvidshub.net/video/1006078/dow-uap-pr32-unresolved-uap-report-syria-october-2024
- www.dvidshub.net/video/1006079/dow-uap-pr33-unresolved-uap-report-syria-october-2024
- web.archive.org/web/20260508030642id_/https://www.war.gov/Portals/1/Interactive/2026/UFO/uap-data.csv?release=5
- www.cbsnews.com/news/ufo-files-pentagon-videos-documents/
More cases from this region: UFO sightings in Syria
