New Jersey Big Drones: Mysterious sightings raise questions about US government/military involvement

Residents across New Jersey have reported seeing big drones the size of small cars flying overhead at night, sparking curiosity and concern. These “New Jersey big drones” sightings have prompted investigations by the FBI and other federal agencies, but the exact nature and origin of these drones remain unclear.

The drones, described as having red and green flashing lights and the ability to change direction rapidly, have been spotted in clusters around Morris and Somerset counties, near the scenic Raritan River and even near sensitive locations such as the Picatinny Arsenal and President-elect Donald Trump’s golf course in Bedminster. The U.S. Coast Guard has also encountered these drones during its operations.

Officials have made statements that apparently mean that even though they do not know the exact nature or origin of the drones, there is no evidence to suggest these drones pose a national security or public safety threat. White House National Security Communications Advisor John Kirby said during a press briefing on Thursday that 1) there is also no evidence there is a foreign nexus, 2) neither the federal authorities nor state or local law enforcement have been able to corroborate “any of the reported visual sightings” with sophisticated electronic detection, 3) “many of the reported sightings are actually manned aircraft that are being operated lawfully” and 4) the federal authorities will continue to investigate and monitor the situation closely.

Statements like those with lack of complete transparency have understandably frustrated residents and lawmakers alike. Even President-elect Donald Trump posted on his own social media platform, Truth Social, saying he does not think the government does not know what is going on and demanded the government tell the public what is going on or shoot the drones down.

The sightings have raised questions about the potential involvement of large drone programs that have not yet been made public. The US government has several known large drone programs, such as the MQ-9 Reaper, MQ-4C Triton, MQ-9 Predator B Unmanned Aircraft System, Black Swift S0, Altius-600, RQ-7 Shadow and RQ-4 Global Hawk, which are used for defense, scientific missions for hurricane research and atmospheric data collection, surveillance and reconnaissance. These drones are operated by the U.S. Air Force, Navy, Army, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and other agencies and are designed for high-altitude, long-endurance missions.

As technology evolves, the US government’s utilization of unmanned aerial systems (UAS), commonly known as drones, has seen significant advancements. These drones, varying in size from small portable units — like Short Range Reconnaissance (SRR) drones, which are the U.S. Army’s inexpensive, rucksack-portable, vertical take-off and landing drones focusing on providing small unmanned aerial systems (sUAS) for reconnaissance missions — to large aircraft-sized vehicles, are employed across multiple branches of the military and various government agencies. Among these, the largest drones play crucial roles in defense, surveillance and intelligence operations.

One of the most prominent large drones in use is the MQ-9 Reaper, operated by the U.S. Air Force. Known for its versatility, the MQ-9 Reaper is capable of carrying out intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR) missions, as well as precision strikes. With a wingspan of 66 feet, it can carry a variety of sensors and weapons, making it a formidable asset in modern warfare.

Another significant large drone is the RQ-4 Global Hawk. Used primarily by the U.S. Air Force, the Global Hawk is designed for high-altitude, long-duration reconnaissance missions. With its impressive wingspan of 131 feet, the RQ-4 can fly at altitudes up to 60,000 feet for over 30 hours, providing continuous surveillance and intelligence gathering over vast areas.

The U.S. Navy also employs large drones, such as the MQ-4C Triton. This high-altitude, long-endurance drone is specifically designed for maritime surveillance. The Triton’s capabilities include a wingspan of 131 feet and the ability to fly for over 24 hours, making it an essential tool for monitoring vast oceanic regions and ensuring maritime security.

CBP employs the MQ-9 Predator B UAS, which is a large drone used for long-endurance reconnaissance and surveillance missions. These drones enhance CBP’s operational capabilities and provide critical situational awareness for border security.

NOAA also utilizes large drones, such as the Black Swift S0 and the Altius-600, for various scientific missions, including hurricane research and atmospheric data collection. These drones help gather valuable data in environments that are difficult to access, improving weather forecasting and environmental monitoring.

The U.S. Army uses the RQ-7 Shadow, the tactical UAV that provides reconnaissance, surveillance and target acquisition capabilities. It has a wingspan of 14 feet and can fly for up to 6 hours.

Several contractors are involved in government drone programs, contributing to the development and deployment of these advanced systems. Companies like Anduril Industries, Integrated Solutions for Systems, Leidos Dynetics and Zone 5 Technologies have been selected by the Pentagon for their expertise in producing cost-effective and scalable drone solutions.

These non-traditional defense contractors are working to create drones that can be rapidly produced and deployed, ensuring that the military and other government agencies have access to the latest technology.

Several of Elon Musk’s companies are also government contractors, with SpaceX perhaps being the most notable, having received billions of dollars in contracts from the US government, including for providing satellite services for the U.S. Space Force and other military operations. Since Tesla has also received federal contracts, primarily from agencies like NASA, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Department of Defense (DoD), with the ones awarded in the last 12 months alone being delivery orders from the DoD subagency Defense Logistics Agency and almost all involving supplying battery power supply, which would probably not be drone-related, we reached out to Musk on his social media platform, X, for any comments he might have on the New Jersey big drones, but have not received a reply since we asked the question three days ago.

Are those maybe Tesla drones over New Jersey? Any comments, @elonmusk?

— US and Global News (@USandGlobalNews) <a href=”https://twitter.com/USandGlobalNews/status/1866868454646534352?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw”>December 11, 2024

</blockquote>

 

<p>&lt;script async src=”https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js” charset=”utf-8″>

In addition to the well-known drones, there are ongoing efforts to develop and integrate larger and more advanced UAS into military operations. The Defense Innovation Unit (DIU) is at the forefront of these efforts, working to rapidly vet and scale commercial unmanned aerial systems technology for the DoD use. One such initiative is the Blue UAS Program, which aims to provide cost-effective and policy-compliant drones for various government applications.

The U.S. Army has also made significant strides with its drone programs. The MQ-1C Gray Eagle is a medium-altitude, long-endurance drone used for reconnaissance and surveillance missions. With a wingspan of 56 feet, the Gray Eagle can fly for up to 30 hours, providing critical real-time intelligence to ground forces.

While much information about these large drones is available, there are often rumors and speculations about undisclosed drone programs. These programs are typically classified, and their details are not made public due to national security concerns. Their testing is also typically not conducted publicly.

It is not just about developing drones of different sizes for a variety of purposes. The capability and authority to counter them also matter. The United States is capable of taking care of drones of all sizes, no two ways about it, but do its defense and law enforcement departments and agencies have the complete legal authority required to do so? Not quite currently.

“Our current authority under the Preventing Emerging Threats Act of 2018, codified at 6 U.S.C. § 124n (“§ 124n”), is crucial but inadequate.”

During the congressional hearing on December 10, 2024, titled “Safeguarding the Homeland from Unmanned Aerial Systems,” which was convened in response to mysterious drone sightings in New Jersey, Keith Jones, deputy executive assistant commissioner of Air and Marine Operations (AMO) at U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Robert Wheeler Jr., assistant director of the FBI’s Critical Incident Response Group, and Brad Wiegmann, deputy assistant attorney general for the Department Of Justice (DOJ) emphasized their needs for additional authority and power to counter unmanned aerial systems (C-UAS) by presenting their concerns and recommendations.

Jones discussed his agency’s C-UAS capabilities to address threats posed by malicious drone use along US borders. CBP’s AMO detect and interdict illicit activities involving UAS, such as surveillance, smuggling and trafficking. With transnational criminal organizations increasingly using drones, CBP faces challenges in maintaining border security. Jones emphasized the need to enhance detection and mitigation capabilities, noting CBP’s efforts to stay ahead of evolving threats through advanced technology and partnerships. He also highlighted the rigorous processes required for the DHS and Department of Transportation approvals to ensure privacy and civil liberties are protected during C-UAS operations.

Wheeler and Wiegmann advocated for changes to the Preventing Emerging Threats Act of 2018 to broaden their agency and department’s authority in combating threats posed by unmanned aerial systems. They sought to expand federal protections for critical sites, empower state, local, tribal and territorial (SLTT) law enforcement to detect and mitigate drone threats, protect high-risk prisoner transports and enable mutual support between DHS, DOJ, DoD and the Department Of Energy. They also emphasizes the need for long-term exemptions to ensure effective and continuous UAS countermeasures, while maintaining strong privacy and civil liberties protections.

Joint witness statement from Wheeler and Wiegmann reads:

“Starting in 2021, Executive Branch agencies that are confronting the growing threat from UAS collaborated to identify the critical gaps in law and policy that impede our ability to defend our national security interests and public safety from UAS threats. The product of that work was the Administration’s Action Plan. At the top of the Action Plan’s recommendations was a recommendation to “Expand Legislative Exemptions for UAS Detection and C-UAS Mitigation Activities.” The Executive Branch also assembled a legislative proposal that would implement some of the recommendations and greatly improve our protections against all types of UAS misuse.
Specifically, the Administration’s proposal would expand the current § 124n authority in targeted ways based on our experience under the law and our assessment of the growing threat. Current § 124n authority will lapse this month, so our existing programs must be reauthorized to avoid shutting down FBI’s ability to protect mass gatherings. The authority is essential because, without it, use of the most effective types of UAS detection and C-UAS technologies could violate criminal laws, including those that prohibit destroying or disabling aircraft and intercepting signals and communications. See, e.g., 18 U.S.C. § 32 (the Aircraft Sabotage Act); 18 U.S.C. §§ 2510 et seq. (the Wiretap Act, also known as Title III); 18 U.S.C. §§ 3121-3127 (the Pen/Trap Statute).
Based on experience gained since 2018, the Administration’s legislative proposal would close additional gaps that currently leave us vulnerable to UAS threats. Current law makes no provision for permanent protection of transportation facilities such as civilian airports; for critical infrastructure such as power plants or oil refineries or chemical facilities; or for high-risk prisoner transports. Gaps in legal authorities leave sensitive federal facilities, such as CIA Headquarters, vulnerable to both intelligence collection by foreign states and physical attacks by hostile actors. Current law also lacks a provision to make federal C-UAS efforts more efficient by allowing DOJ and DHS to fulfill each other’s statutory missions, and those of the Departments of Defense (“DoD”) and Energy (“DOE”), in exigent circumstances. Perhaps most critically, § 124n does not authorize SLTT law enforcement to engage in any kind of C-UAS activity that would otherwise violate federal law. The absence of such authority has hamstrung their efforts. Neither DOJ nor DHS has the resources to fill the thousands of requests each year we receive to use our authority to assist our SLTT partners.”

Later adding:

“The legislation and its implementing policies will continue to ensure that we respect privacy and constitutional rights as we conduct our UAS detection and mitigation activities, by limiting government actions towards protected First Amendment activities and regulating what information may be collected and shared. It is important to note that the technologies that we employ typically detect the presence of drones operating in a specific space and the only communications that are identified are the electronic data passed between the operator’s controller and the UAS. Those communications direct the physical operation of the drone. The
technologies used by the Department do not extract text messages, e-mail, or internet search histories from phones or tablets used to control drones, nor do they allow law enforcement to listen to voice calls. Specifically, the detection systems collect information such as the drone vendor and model; drone and controlling device serial number and media access control, or MAC, address; geolocation of the drone; location of the controller; and the most recent takeoff location and “home” location. This is much like the information required to be broadcasted by manned aircraft, and similar to that which the FAA now requires most drones to broadcast under the Remote Identification of Unmanned Aircraft rule. However, for drones that do not comply with FAA requirements, it is critical that the government can collect the information unilaterally, exercise discretion on when to use jamming or take-over technology by seeking out the operator first (time and circumstances permitting), and make more informed decisions.”

New Jersey Governor Phil Murphy also urged President Joe Biden to empower state and local law enforcement with the necessary authority to address threats from UASs. Murphy emphasized that current laws restrict state and local agencies from effectively dealing with these threats and called for legislative changes to grant them the power to detect, track and mitigate illicit drone activities. He highlighted the importance of enhancing local capabilities to respond promptly to UAS-related incidents, ensuring better protection for the state’s residents and critical infrastructure.

Those drone-like flying objects in the New Jersey sky remain a mystery. What we know — or have been told — so far is there is no evidence to suggest threat to national security or public safety even though nobody knows the exact nature or origin of those big drones flying in New Jersey and there is no foreign nexus.

Let’s let you think about the remaining few options.

After reading this article, you already know a bit too much.

Featured image via a press release by DoD’s DIU