SALGILWater does not ask the way.한국어

CASE FILE · DD-36

Claim of a concealed giant craft outside Seoul

Period · 2023–현재Place · Claimed to be outside Seoul, South Korea

01 · OVERVIEW

Case overview

This is not a documented crash case but a claimed concealment site circulating publicly since 2023. In an October 2023 VladTV interview, Steven Greer said an unnamed person allegedly briefed into eighteen sensitive Pentagon programmes in the early 2000s knew of extraterrestrial vehicles stored near Fort Sill, Oklahoma, and at a facility outside Seoul. Separately, in July 2023 Ross Coulthart said sources had told him of an object outside the United States that was too large to move and had been covered by a building, but he named no country or site. Online users merged the stories and proposed the circular Anyang aviation radio-navigation station, or VORTAC, as a candidate. In February 2026, U.S. Representative Eric Burlison said he had heard reports of a huge object at a foreign site, while stressing that he had no hard evidence and did not believe the South Korea speculation. No public crash record, construction file, photograph, recovered material or identified firsthand witness currently establishes the claim.
Anyang aviation radio-navigation station on Bibong Mountain
02 · Online candidate site · not evidence of a craft

A 2022 photograph of Anyang's aviation radio-navigation station, proposed online as a candidate. It is not evidence that this is the site in Greer's claim.

Anyang Urban Records Institute · CC BY-NC-ND ↗

03 · IMAGE CONTEXT

Image analysis

The image shows a circular summit platform with navigation equipment at its centre. Its shape helped fuel the theory, but Korea Airports Corporation and transport records identify it as a VOR/TACAN navigation-safety facility. The photograph documents the candidate site's appearance; it shows neither a craft nor concealment construction.

04 · RECORD TIMELINE

Record chronology

Greer's Disclosure 2.0 event

At the National Press Club, Greer made broad allegations about secret retrieval and reverse-engineering programmes and called for whistleblower protection. The reviewed event record does not specifically identify a site outside Seoul.

Coulthart's ‘too big to move’ story

Ross Coulthart told Project Unity of an object outside the United States over which a building had allegedly been erected. He supplied no country, coordinates or building name, so the statement itself does not identify South Korea.

Greer names a facility outside Seoul

In a VladTV interview, Greer said an unnamed former Pentagon insider knew of a ‘very large extraterrestrial vehicle’ stored outside Seoul. What is public is Greer's retelling; the source's identity, testimony and documents were not produced.

Anyang VORTAC speculation spreads

Its circular form and proximity to Seoul made Anyang VORTAC a popular online candidate. Neither Greer nor Coulthart publicly identified this facility in the remarks reviewed.

Burlison discusses a foreign site

Burlison said he had heard reports of an object outside the United States that was too large to move and had a building constructed around it. He also said he had no hard evidence and did not believe speculation that it was in South Korea.

No public verification material

No site access, sample, crash record, independent witness or verified construction chain has been released. The file remains an active, unresolved claim.

05 · EVIDENCE REVIEW

Nature of the evidence

Documented record

The public remarks by Greer, Coulthart and Burlison are traceable; Anyang VORTAC is a real radio-navigation facility managed within Korea Airports Corporation's airway-facilities system; and online posts and programmes have circulated the site as a candidate.

Disputed · unresolved

The object's existence, extraterrestrial origin, alleged method of downing, discovery date, exact site and construction purpose are all unverified. It is unknown whether Greer's anonymous informant and Burlison's reports share a source, and Burlison rejected the South Korea inference.

Personal testimonyContact claimUnverifiable

06 · COUNTERANALYSIS

Counterarguments and disputes

01

Steven Greer's position

Greer says an anonymous insider read into sensitive programmes knew storage sites outside Seoul and near Fort Sill and would require subpoena power and witness protection to testify. Public verification has not established the source's identity or access.

02

Ross Coulthart's position

Coulthart says multiple sources told him of an object too large to move, but he withheld its location. The story resembles the Seoul claim, yet no public evidence establishes that they are the same case.

03

Eric Burlison's position

Burlison says he heard reports from inside and outside government but drew a clear line: he had no hard evidence. He declined to name a country for classification reasons and publicly said he did not believe the South Korea theory.

04

The Anyang VORTAC theory

Proponents cite the large circular platform, mountain location, security perimeter and proximity to Seoul. Those features are also compatible with an aviation navigation facility, and no document links the named speakers to this site.

05

Attachment to the 1976 Seoul incident

Some users attached the 1976 Seoul anti-aircraft episode as the alleged shoot-down. Greer gave no date, while an October 1976 U.S. diplomatic cable records aircraft using Anyang VORTAC as a navigation fix, conflicting with a simple story that it was hastily built after that event.

06

Testable conventional explanation

Korea Airports Corporation and transport-sector records identify Anyang as a VOR, TACAN and ADS-B navigation-safety installation. This explanation directly matches its form, antenna and published aeronautical identifier and is verifiable from public records.

07 · ASSESSMENT

Evidence assessment

01 · Source statementsPartial

Public remarks by Greer, Coulthart and Burlison are traceable, but the central informants remain anonymous.

02 · Claim specificityModerate

The claim includes ‘outside Seoul,’ a large object and facility storage, but lacks coordinates, date, programme name and an identified firsthand witness.

03 · FalsifiabilityHigh

Once a candidate is named, historical aerial imagery and land, construction and navigation-facility records can test the timeline.

04 · Physical and documentary evidenceNone public

No craft photograph, recovered material, construction plan, sample or declassified document has been released.

05 · Narrative-conflation riskVery high

Statements by three different figures, the 1976 incident and the Anyang facility have been merged online into a single narrative.

Provisional conclusionAssessment: a specific but unsubstantiated active claim. It is established that Greer mentioned a facility outside Seoul and that Anyang VORTAC has a documented aviation function, but no evidence connects the two. Coulthart's and Burlison's remarks overlap only in describing a huge foreign object; neither confirms the same site, and Burlison rejected the South Korea theory. The archive will not classify this as a concealed extraterrestrial craft unless an identified firsthand witness, construction chronology, official access result or physical material becomes public. It does not encourage unauthorized access to or photography of navigation or security facilities; only lawful public and remote records should be used.

08 · COMPARATIVE FILE

Comparative record

Keep separate from the 1976 Seoul anti-aircraft incident

The 1976 case is a separate event with contemporary records of anti-aircraft fire, civilian observations and casualties from falling rounds. The giant-craft concealment claim emerged in 2023, and Greer did not provide a shoot-down year. Keeping them separate exposes how retrospective linkage is constructed.

Open comparison →

09 · SOURCE TRAIL

Sources and further reading

Check primary documents, government institutions and record repositories wherever possible.
← All Disclosure Day records