Why the Trump Disclosure Decision May Not Help Aviation Safety
Special Guest Column By Todd Curtis
A February 19, 2026, White House announcement promising the release of secret government UFO information has led to a lot of discussions about what it means, including whether this is the beginning of “Big D” disclosure, an official confirmation that there exist technologically advanced non-human species that are responsible for some of the mysterious objects and phenomena that have been seen not only in the U.S., but also around the world. If that is indeed the case, that date may be the beginning of a significant, paradigm-changing moment for society. However, it probably won’t help the aviation safety community because the government’s efforts have been on addressing national security concerns, not aviation safety concerns.
Actions that the U.S. government has already taken regarding UFOs support my position. Two bills passed by the U.S. Congress in 2022 and 2023 accomplished two things:
Defined the term Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena (UAP) as a replacement for the much more well-known term UFO, and
Created a program called the All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office (AARO), managed jointly by the Department of Defense and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, which has the stated mission of minimizing technical and intelligence surprise by synchronizing identification, attribution, and mitigation of UAP in the vicinity of national security areas.
Definitions of UAP
The government’s efforts have been shaped by the definitions they use. The term UAP (Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena), which was defined by laws passed by the U.S. Congress [50 USC 3373 (n)(8)] as a replacement for Unidentified Flying Object (UFO) states that UAP are:
Airborne objects that are not immediately identifiable;
Transmedium objects or devices; and
Submerged objects or devices that are not immediately identifiable and that display behavior or performance characteristics suggesting that the objects or devices may be related to the objects or devices described in subparagraph (A) or (B)
This definition of UAP is appropriate for the organizations that manage AARO because their focus is on military and national security threats, the kind of threats that represent intentional hazards directed at the U.S. In contrast, most aviation hazards aircraft face are caused by natural phenomena, inadequate or inappropriate responses to hazards, and unintentional acts.
The following definition of UAP is based on behaviors or phenomena that are observed, experienced, or detected that meet one or more of the following criteria:
A vehicle that appears not to fit the description, or exhibit performance, of any known aerospace vehicle, or any aerospace vehicle that could reasonably be constructed using conventional technology,
A vehicle that appears to operate between more than one medium, for example, between the atmosphere and space, or between air and water, with performance characteristics that are beyond the capabilities of known vehicles, such as rockets or submarine-launched cruise missiles,
Natural phenomena that behave in unexpected ways,
An unknown phenomenon, observed in the atmosphere, or either entering or leaving the atmosphere, that appears to have the ability to actively change its position, appearance, size, or shape, or
An unknown phenomenon producing unexpected effects on aircraft, aviation infrastructure, or people.
Except for unidentified or unidentifiable submerged objects, which are not an aviation safety concern, any other situation that fits the U.S. government’s definition of UAP would meet one or more of my UAP criteria.
What is Disclosure?
In the context of research related to Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena (UAP), this refers to the U.S. government removing, either partially or entirely, restrictions on sharing its knowledge or understanding of UAP with the general public, including knowledge of the existence of technologies, whether aerospace-related or not, that may have contributed to some UAP reports. This removal of restrictions would apply to data, analyses, or insights developed directly or indirectly from the U.S. government's study of UAP or its effects.
The removal of restrictions would also apply to programs or agreements, past, present, or planned, involving civilian or military organizations within the U.S. government, U.S. government contractors, foreign governments, or other organizations or individuals that were provided physical artifacts, technology, and scientific knowledge that was derived either directly or indirectly from UAP.
There are declassification processes within the U.S. government that will likely have to be completed before information is released to the public, and those processes are different depending on the nature of the information and the government organization responsible for the declassification effort.
What Kind of Information Is Useful for Aviation Safety
Issues of interest to the aviation safety community largely revolve around two related concerns: hazards, which are conditions or objects that could foreseeably cause or contribute to an incident or aircraft accident, and risk, which is the combination of a hazard and the possible negative outcomes associated with that hazard. Managing those risks and enhancing aviation safety can’t happen without understanding the hazards they pose.
How Useful Is the Information That is Already Available?
Past UAP-related research, most notably Project Blue Book in the U.S., found that less than 10% of the analyzed cases were classified as unknown. Ongoing research in the U.S. and France indicates a similarly low percentage of unknowns. In the U.S., AARO published a report in 2024 that found that of 757 suspected UAP cases, only 21 of them, representing less than 3% of the total, merited further investigation. GEIPAN, a UAP investigation and analysis program managed by the French national space agency CNES, yielded similar results. As of January 2026, of the 3,301 suspected UAP cases, only 105, or 3.2% were classified as an unidentified phenomenon.
In my own research, which focuses on identifying UAP-related accident, incident, and hazard reports collected by NASA, FAA, and NTSB, suspected UAP cases fall into one of three categories:
There is not enough evidence to determine whether a UAP is present or absent.
The evidence supports a conventional explanation.
The evidence supports the conclusion that a UAP was involved.
From an aviation safety perspective, the third category will be most useful for identifying UAP-related hazards. Events in the second category likely already involve hazards that are already addressed by existing technology and procedures. Events in the first category likely lack the detail needed to either identify hazards or to develop procedures or technology to manage the risks associated with those hazards.
Why Declassified U.S. Government Information Will Likely Not Be Useful
The efforts of AARO, the most prominent U.S. government UAP analysis effort, are based on a definition of UAP that addresses the concerns of the military and national security communities rather than aviation safety concerns. In addition, declassified information will likely exclude information that is typically exempt from U.S. government declassification processes, including:
Most or all details associated with any ongoing military, national security, or law enforcement operations,
Detailed sensor data from military or intelligence community systems,
Anything from a government contractor or other nongovernmental entity that is proprietary, considered a trade secret, or otherwise not subject to public disclosure, or
Other information, such as personal medical details, that are not subject to disclosure,
Most or all details associated with projects or events that are subject to secrecy agreements with other countries.
In addition, older events that would be relevant to aviation safety may have limited use if that information is:
Missing most of the original details and background information because the records have been lost, degraded, or destroyed,
In a raw, unprocessed, or haphazardly arranged form, or
Is stored using an obsolete data storage medium or storage technology that can’t be migrated to a usable format.
Why the Declassification of UAP Data May Indirectly Help Civil Aviation
While the release of classified information will likely not directly provide significant new insights into aviation safety, a formal and open acknowledgment by the U.S. government of the presence of UAP will likely reduce the stigma that has been associated with UAP-related subjects and the past and lead to a greater willingness among aviation organizations and aviation professionals to discuss the safety aspects of UAP. Whether the aviation community will recognize the opportunity and encourage greater reporting of UAP events depends on whether key organizations such as the FAA, NASA, and aircraft operators change their relationship with UAP and directly address UAP-related hazards.
###
ABOUT THE WRITER:
While Todd Curtis is currently a member of two aviation industry organizations that are addressing UAP: Americans for Safe Aerospace, and the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA) UAP Integration and Outreach Committee, both chaired by Ryan Graves - he contributed the article here above to The WOW! Signal independently of both organizations, and as a Founding Member of The Hollywood Disclosure Alliance. See: https://www.hollywooddisclosurealliance.org/todd-curtis
