Crashed Saucer(?) Photographed In Brazil (November 2006)

[OldTimeRadio]

So - there will be a cheap UFO movie being filmed in Brazil that lost a major set piece right? Anybody seen a story about that?

The Terror of the Teeny-Tiny Time Travellers form Thanatos.

Just as they're poised to take over, they're all accidentally stepped on and crushed to death by the pedestrians of Rio and Sao Paulo. <g>

 

[EnolaGaia]

Possible Crashed Flying Saucer Photographed in Brazil - November 2006 ...

Here are the photos from the MIA webpage.

 

[EnolaGaia]

I'm highly confident I know what this object is. It's a stainless steel cap or replacement head for a vessel (pressure vessel; tank; hopper), most probably used in material processing (e.g., an oil refinery, pulp processing plant, etc.). The central "dome" is a standard flanged head. The 'skirt' is a conical steel section for affixing the head to a larger vessel.

NOTE: I was once chief design draftsman for a custom metal fabrication plant, and I've designed, drawn, seen, and inspected many such objects. I can also attest to the fact that vessel components of such size are commonly shipped as separate units to be integrated and welded together at the customer site.

The story mentions an alleged UFO crash in Bahia. That's the aspect of the story that should be (or should have been ... ) investigated. I'm sure this piece of stainless steel fabrication isn't evidence for such a crash.

 

[XEPER_]

Everything in the photos - apart from the saucer - looks out of focus. So it makes me wonder if it was added to the photo at a later date.
But if it's a simple piece of machinery, and genuinely on that truck, why isn't it strapped down?

 

[EnolaGaia]

Everything in the photos - apart from the saucer - looks out of focus. So it makes me wonder if it was added to the photo at a later date.
But if it's a simple piece of machinery, and genuinely on that truck, why isn't it strapped down?

I wondered about that, too ... It appears there are 4 stanchions(?) or lugs affixed to the flat-bed trailer - the 2 port-side ones visible in the first photo, the 2 rear ones visible in the second photo, and the starboard-side front one not visible. The photos are too fuzzy to discern whether these stanchions reach over the 'skirt' rim to clamp it in place. I suspect they do, but I'm not 100% certain.

If those lugs clamp the piece it would explain why the peripheral / outer rim appears to be bowed downward where it extends over the side of the trailer.

Based on my experience with such things, I'd suspect the piece is also chained underneath (through / to the flat-bed trailer). Such heavy hauler flat-bed trailers are typically "skeletal" rather than solid.

 

[XEPER_]

Do they drive on the left side of the road in Brazil?

 

[EnolaGaia]

Do they drive on the left side of the road in Brazil?

No. They drive on the right side (a la USA).

 

[BeardSprite]

It appears there are 4 stanchions(?) or lugs affixed to the flat-bed trailer - the 2 port-side ones visible in the first photo, the 2 rear ones visible in the second photo, and the starboard-side front one not visible. The photos are too fuzzy to discern whether these stanchions reach over the 'skirt' rim to clamp it in place. I suspect they do, but I'm not 100% certain.
...
Based on my experience with such things, I'd suspect the piece is also chained underneath (through / to the flat-bed trailer). Such heavy hauler flat-bed trailers are typically "skeletal" rather than solid.

Yeah, I saw those and wondered if thats what they where - beat me too it

Also, I do get a sort of 'sigh, here we are, waiting by the side of the road because we have to wait for our mate to go and get the load starps, because he thought we had them, and we thought he had them...' from the guys stood waiting by the truck+car.

Shame we can't make out the apparent* logo on the door of the car parked by teh truck.

* I say that, it might as easily be a bodywork repair patch!

Do they drive on the left side of the road in Brazil?

No. They drive on the right side (a la USA).

I guess this is a three lane (at least) carriageway/highway, then.

As for the bluring, it ony appears blury to me on the leftmost egde of the picture - towards the direction of travel - is that how photography frpm moving vehicles works? I have no idea about how the motion would affect sharpness of images, so I couldn't say that's a potential cause - I'm sure someone hear-abouts will be more knowleadgeable on that front.

 

[XEPER_]

No. They drive on the right side (a la USA).

To me, that looks like a road with only two lanes, and that white car is driving on the left. The truck and the guy taking the photo are parked up in what we call lay-bys in the UK. Which makes me wonder if it IS Brazil (not that it really matters since none of us think that's a real crashed flying saucer but hey, it's interesting lol).

 

[BeardSprite]

Looks to me like three lanes and a (hard) shoulder - the car the pictures are taken from appears to be moving - the two images are approaching and then just passed the truck - bluring on the images (consistent with being in motion?) - which would put the car on the innermost (nearest the middle) lane, with a series of similar lanes in the opposite direction to the left side of this car.

You can also see in the first shot (also, I think these images are shown in reverse order - the one shown second would appear to be the 'approach' photo) another car close behind, but in the middle of the three lanes, with one empty between that car and the shoulder the truck is parked on the verge of.

In the other photo you can see another car close behind the photographers car - in the wing mirror.

I'm taking it on good faith that the shotwas taken in Brazil as stated, to create the observations of this post, and also that the photographer is therefore in the front passanger seat of a left hand drive vehicle.

of course the pictures could have been taken from the opposite shoulder, or the images flipped, or in another country altogether, but I doubt there's anything in the images that could confirm any of that.

 

[EnolaGaia]

To me, that looks like a road with only two lanes, and that white car is driving on the left. ...

The text accompanying the article linked in post #1 states it is a two-lane highway, the semi-truck had to proceed down the middle of the highway owing to its wide load, and there were 4 federal police cars accompanying the hauler (2 out front; 2 behind).

There's a bigger problem with the initially cited reports ...

The two photos alleged to illustrate the object-in-transit text don't match what the text says about the photograph being taken. The text claims the photographer took one photo at the gas station where the truck stopped, but the originally linked article shows two photos. Graylien pointed this out back in 2006.

The only thing that makes the mismatched pieces fit together is to assume the Frank Warren blog / UFO Chronicles version of the story noted by Predatorpt in post #19 is in fact the original version of the translated article. That version shows the single "blue" photo at the bottom of the first-linked (from post #1) version of the story as the only photo. The first-linked story clearly indicates this "blue" photo isn't the one taken in November 2006, but it shows a hauler parked at what appears to be a gas station (as the text describes).

In other words, it may well be that the article first linked by the OP is in fact a subsequent / recycled piece in which the Alienationsam editor(s) completely f**ked up when adding photos presumably intended to illustrate the earlier similar object mentioned in the text. They botched the insertion so as to give the appearance the November 2006 photo was the earlier one and vice versa.

The UFO Chronicles version was dated 4 December 2006. The Alienationsam version isn't dated on the article's webpage, but the earliest December 2006 capture at the Wayback Machine says the website was last updated on 10 December. This means the Alienationsam article first linked from this thread could have been created up to circa 6 days after the UFO Chronicles version.

 

[Comfortably Numb]

It can't be a, 'flying saucer', because it doesn't look like this, which is actually what Kenneth Arnold believed he had observed and is evidently keen to point same out here:

As we have long since understood, the only reason those nine enigmatic objects ended up being given that name by the press, was because of the terminology he is attributing as using to describe their undulating flight formation, 'like a saucer if you skip it across the water'.

So why on earth (sic), nowadays, keep chasing something which never existed in the first place.

This would perhaps be a rhetorical question. No flying saucers, then everything built on that foundation is equally specious and entire pyramid of cards comes crashing down.

As a card-carrying ufologist, since my feature, cover article in FT137, I could only stress the point because there are many alternative avenues of related research and flying saucers are a complete waste of both time and resources.

Recently, spending time studying an invaluable resource unavailable then, I have come across some material which doesn't seem to have been previously highlighted.

It further, categorically, supports conclusions of my two year, extensive research undertaking and the demonstrable conclusion of what Kenneth Arnold had truly seen that fateful day, whilst flying over the cascade mountains.

I shall assemble same and post on the main Kenneth Arnold thread later today.