• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.
View attachment 38348

Found on Google. It’s (apparently) a 1980 Land Rover, though “V” suffix was 1979.

The ad, regrettably, is long dead, so l can’t clarify the meaning of “Military Lights”.

maximus otter
I’m guessing it should be Land Rover, Military with lights. It’s a tripped down Land Rover known as an air transportable one, a lot lighter than the normal models.

As a military vehicle sold to the public it would have to be reregistered so it may be that when this was done it was a transfer of a previous plate (although why you would do that unless your initials were WDS?).
 
I was sent a copy of this picture and was asked not to discuss it publicly, so a bit of a surprise to find it posted in an online forum.
There is much basic information missing. What was the exact time and location the picture was taken? Was the object high up or low down? In what direction?
If you play with the contrast you can see that each light has a double core. There is also what appears to be an internal reflection below the right-hand light.
Given that the Rendlesham sightings did not start until early on December 26, and we don't know where the picture was taken, I see no reason to connect it with the Rendlesham case.
 
From the following, apparently.

Quoting my then correspondence:

Halt has actually mentioned what may be confirmation of same. In a little-known interview, for long since defunct UK 'Sightings' magazine [volume 2, issue 3], Halt reportedly stated:

[BEGINNING OF ARTICLE]
It seemed peculiar, but an unscheduled American CS Galaxy transport aeroplane landed at RAE Woodbridge a few days after the first incident, bringing with it its own security personnel and Halt wasn't even allowed to know what their mission was. With that, why did a Lt. Colonel and Deputy Base Commander, with a security clearance too high to mention, not have the authority to know what a visiting plane is doing on his base?

"You have to keep in mind that this was a foreign country to us. We had no authority here whatsoever, but I can assure you if it were within the United States, we'd have cordoned the place off with military police and we'd have the authorities there, probably in there until any agencies would have told us to back off.

He also said that following the planes arrival un-marked helicopters, that were not from Woodbridge, were seen above the landing site during the following days.
[END]

I now also note that in answer to my further enquiries, Burroughs stated they were, 'single rotor' helicopters.

This couldn't possibly... surely... have a connection to the Cash-Landrum 'UFO' case, occuring around the exact same time over in the U.S. ....

I shall explain shortly.
It looks to me as if there is either a connection or it is the weirdest coincidence in the history of ufology!
 
From the following, apparently.

Quoting my then correspondence:

Halt has actually mentioned what may be confirmation of same. In a little-known interview, for long since defunct UK 'Sightings' magazine [volume 2, issue 3], Halt reportedly stated:

[BEGINNING OF ARTICLE]
It seemed peculiar, but an unscheduled American CS Galaxy transport aeroplane landed at RAE Woodbridge a few days after the first incident, bringing with it its own security personnel and Halt wasn't even allowed to know what their mission was. With that, why did a Lt. Colonel and Deputy Base Commander, with a security clearance too high to mention, not have the authority to know what a visiting plane is doing on his base?

"You have to keep in mind that this was a foreign country to us. We had no authority here whatsoever, but I can assure you if it were within the United States, we'd have cordoned the place off with military police and we'd have the authorities there, probably in there until any agencies would have told us to back off.

He also said that following the planes arrival un-marked helicopters, that were not from Woodbridge, were seen above the landing site during the following days.
[END]

I now also note that in answer to my further enquiries, Burroughs stated they were, 'single rotor' helicopters.

This couldn't possibly... surely... have a connection to the Cash-Landrum 'UFO' case, occuring around the exact same time over in the U.S. ....

I shall explain shortly.
I think we may be on the same wavelength here, this is where my timeline (nearly finished) is taking me as well.
 
Does anyone know what sort of forestry vehicles, if any, were operating in Rendlesham Forest at the time? I’ve been looking at a few Forwarder vehicles as a potential source of lights other than military vehicles. Interesting that these can have lights positioned all around the top of the cab. Lots of lights.

As an example....

1618921473728.jpeg


Bruunett Lightweight Forwarder
Bruunett Lightweight Forwarder
Date Added: 05 June 2012Contributor: Norman DavidsonYear of Photo: 1980Picture No: 1127
Photograph courtesy of Forest Research Office, Newton.

The Bruunett leightweight 8 wheeled forwarder was one of the early machines capable of carrying timber loads in sensitive and soft forest sites very efficiently. The Scandinavian machines were brought into the country when first thinning operations became increasingly mechanised and this particular machine in 1980 must have been in the forefront of the imports.
 
I have completed a very basic timeline for the major events at Rendlesham. I think it is clear from this that the main event happened prior to either the Burroughs-Penniston encounter or the Halt and company search of the woods. My working hypothesis is this:

1. Something unusual, maybe connected with a Russian satellite, was going on in the area, mainly over the Channel maybe. A Black Project craft was involved, but it developed major problems and requested permission to come down at Rendlesham, maybe the closest major base with air rescue facilities. This was when the Red Alert went out to some of the base personnel.

2. A bit later, Garry Collins saw the triangular object at a low altitude, dripping liquid before crash landing in the trees.

3. Subsequently a specialist team cleaned up the area and removed the trees.

4. To cover up the real nature of the crash a fake site was prepared and Burroughs et al. were lured towards it.

5. To create further confusion Halt and his team were also lured out. Maybe they just made an amazing number of observational errors or maybe someone was really firing beams of light at them -- not difficult to do.

6. Further efforts were made to push the ET story (the most crass must surely be the alleged Intelligence Officer who informed a British radar operator that aliens had landed and communicated with Conrad!) Mind control methods were used (maybe by AFOSI) under the guise of interrogation) to implant false memories of aliens working on repairs, etc.

7. Maybe it is just a coincidence that what seems to have been another black project craft got into trouble in the US (Cash/Landrum case), and caused radiation damage to the witnesses, around the same period. Or maybe both had been manufactured at the same time and an inherent fault happened to be triggered in both cases.

The people who go in to clean up after such events are very thorough -- Nick Cook mentions a stealth fighter crash in 1986 where a team of very aggressive soldiers cleared everybody out of the area and left no sign of what had happened, even though it had been seen and heard over a wide area.

This was nine years before the Belgian UFO wave which featured triangular objects, and yet several witnesses (who were clearly not influenced by popular flying saucer stereotypes) specifically used that description. As is known, NIDS researched such sightings in the US and found that most were observed flying between USAF bases.
 

Attachments

  • TIMELINE OF EVENTS AT RENDLESHAM.pdf
    207.2 KB · Views: 20
Taking the picture from the linked site, and putting it through a simple online tool to alter the contrast, brightness and sharpness, a definite structure appears.
From what I can see it appears to be a vehicle of some sort, possibly a pick-up type of vehicle as seen from behind.
I indicate on my pic here the items I can make out (top) and then the clear straight lines that I can make out (bottom).
The rest of the 'edges' are too indistinct to draw on clearly, but there is an obvious car-like shape to it.
As I expect it is facing away from us the headlights are illuminating an area in front of it which is the shapeless blob to the right (the vehicle is not parked straight in line with our POV).
The headlights being on would also mean the dash lights are on.
The lower rear assembly area is partially obscured by something (foliage?) hence why the rear lights are not visible.
IMO - Possibly some sort of farm worker.

I'm not saying definitely that is what this is, but once this much more detail is visible it does seem likely.
filtered pic.png
 
The people who go in to clean up after such events are very thorough -- Nick Cook mentions a stealth fighter crash in 1986...
Noooo..... don't go there!!!!

Although there seems to be an absence of tangible evidence for any crash/cover up, I did come across the following again, only last night.

My query, circa mid-199s, originated from something I noticed had been posted by 'John Howland' on a forum, for those interested in stealth aircraft development over the years.

I wrote to the person operating said forum:

Regarding John Howland's F-111A serial numbers:

"0069 may be the plane that crashed on approach to RAF Woodbridge, Suffolk, UK Dec 26/27, 1980. However, also reported as being at the Southern Museum of Flight, Birmingham, AL.

Noted in July 2002 in a fenced copmpund at Birmingham Apt, AL".

As this conceivably relates to an incident I have investigated, I would be extremely grateful if you could please clarify the source for a possible F-111A crash on approach to RAF Woodbridge at that time - I'm not aware of any other reference to it.
(End)

He did respond, to which I replied:

Looks like 67-0069 is indeed on display at the Southern Museum of Flight, Birmingham, Alabama.

The RAF Woodbridge crash John Howland refers to is in fact the infamous 'Rendlesham Forest UFO' case. It's a story I have researched in depth.

Although there's zero evidence of any aircraft crash being involved, I did hear rumour that an F-111E had lost a tactical nuke and this is what had been 'covered-up', as such.

I would obviously be interested to know where John's crash story originated - do you please have an e-mail address for him?
(End)

Unfortunately no and the trail went cold.

However, merely for general interest, I was just looking at the following material - anything therein sound familiar!

https://www.key.aero/forum/general-discussion/3850843-sap-black-project-aircraft-sightings-in-the-uk
 
It looks to me as if there is either a connection or it is the weirdest coincidence in the history of ufology!
One difficulty with unearthing correspondence from my archives, has been that saved copies can span a lengthy timeframe and were backed up on seperate discs.

This can occasionally result in finding later material which supercedes something which seemed to be the final exchange.

We have one such example here and it's extremely significant.

So far as Halt also witnessing these helicopter flights, this is now questionable, with Burroughs subsequently clarifying that Halt was "completely out of the loop" and only knew about the helicopters because Burroughs told him.

Burroughs states that before being posted on duty, his shift commander alerted him not to report any 'UFOs' as "they, the base" knew what was going on.

Did, "they, the base" actually know what these alleged helicopter flights concerned, or was it connected to the also purported C-5 arrival and 'the base', per se, informed not to interfere...?

Last thing needed, apparently, was for these activities to spark another UFO alert...

You wrote, "...either a connection or it is the weirdest coincidence..."

Coincidental, as in relation to one anecdote highlighted on the aforementioned web site, in relation to the 1994 'black project aircraft' incident at Boscombe Down...?

"There was a nosewheel collapse on landing. A C-5 was diverted from Rammstein AFB to collect it"...

Not that I'm one for conspiracy theories... :cool:
 
Wow... Definitelymaybe.. I'm just going to sit back and watch Comfortably Numb and Ian and Eburacum go bananas. :bananas:
Sounds and looks a bit familiar.
From 'Skycrash', by Brenda Butler, Dot Street and Jenny Randles, published in 1984:

"Brenda and Dot were directed to see a Mr Brown, who owns a house about three quarters of a mile further down the path..

...he was the only other person who might be described as a farmer...

...At first sight... He had a large pink house... and a tractor standing idle...".

Game, set and match...

From Halt's memo:

"...and approximately two meters high. It illuminated the entire forest with a white light. The object itself had a pulsing red light on top and a bank(s) of blue lights underneath...

...At this time the animals on a nearby farm went into a frenzy...".

Well of course they did, they were being fed...

OK... slightly, 'tounge in cheek'...

Although, when you think about it...

:btime::popc:
 
So, from his own words, we can tell that he misidentified the lighthouse.

I dealt with this point, among many others, in my analysis of Halt’s tape here
http://www.ianridpath.com/ufo/halttape-analysis2.html

For views of how the lighthouse lined up with the farmhouse see this page
http://www.ianridpath.com/ufo/rendlesham2.html
It's absolutely brilliant research.

I have just found a couple of related maps I seemingly made many years back and presumably these tie in?

MAP5.GIF


Map6.gif
 
The aforenoted maps helpfully pinpoint Halt's location, with RAF Bentwaters effectively to the north and RAF Woodbridge due east.

Whether or not Halt thinks his final sighting of continued 'light beams', from that star-like object to the south, are coming down on Bentwaters or Woodbridge, can we now end any further debate by concluding that in either event he is consumately mistaken?
 
The aforenoted maps helpfully pinpoint Halt's location, with RAF Bentwaters effectively to the north and RAF Woodbridge due east. ...

I think you mean "... RAF Woodbridge due west."
 
Well, here's a surprise...

It's the primary extract from an email sent to Alan Cohen former member of the 81st Security Police Squadron and colleague of both John Burroughs and Kevin Conde.

In this, I include the transcript of a talk given by Halt in 1994.

I had no recollection such a transcript existed and can't even remember how I obtained my copy.

However, it is by far the most detailed account, explaining the genesis of what is now the second most famous UFO case and which once held such high hopes of integrity:


Alan,

I did ask Burroughs if he recalled an ‘Alan Cohen’ and he does remember you as “desk Sgt for the flight”, noting that Sgt McCabe was on duty during the night of 25/26 December.

Halt has spoken in detail about Sgt ‘Crash’ McCabe. This is an extract from a rare transcript I recently acquired - as yet unpublished - from a lecture Halt gave at a UK ‘UFO Magazine’ conference in 1994:

As I walked into the Desk area, control center, Sergeant ‘Crash’ McCabe was on duty – a very intelligent, very sharp witted young man. Very enjoyable to deal with. And he wasn’t above playing a joke on some of his contemporaries.

As I walked in he started to laugh, and I thought I had walked into another prank. Keep in mind this is holiday season and a little levity may be in order. And he started laughing, and I thought I’m the brunt of the joke, or something. And I said, ‘What’s so funny, Crash?’. He said, ‘Colonel, you’re not going to believe this.’ I said, ‘Not going to believe what? Try me.’ And he said, ‘Well, last night Burroughs and Penniston and Cabansag were out in the woods chasing a UFO!’. And I looked at him and said, ‘What’s the rest of the joke? What’s the punch line?’ And be said, ‘No, I’m serious’. ‘I don’t believe it’, he said, ‘But something happened last night. And the Lieutenant. . .’ (the police officer on duty on every shift, who is over both the security side and the law enforcement side) ‘. . . said, ‘Don’t put it in the police blotter.’ In other words, don’t make it a matter of record.

And I said to Sgt. McCabe, ‘Well, what happened? What do you know?’. He said, ‘Well, somewhere around midnight...’ (he did tell me the exact time, but I don’t remember now) ‘...around midnight, Burroughs...’...

On that particular night we had two patrol cars, Police 4 and Police 5, because of a problem with the other vehicle both Police 4 and Police 5 were riding in the same vehicle. Sgt. Burroughs was driving and Staff Sgt. Bud Steffens was riding alongside. Steffens, I understand, was suffering from having been up a long time, and from having a very good Christmas Day ...[unclear].

Because the base was pretty much closed down we had the Back Gate and East Gate closed, we normally lock it after dark and open it in the morning. We didn’t have the manpower to keep a patrolman on it all night long without keeping two people for two shifts every night. But for once some type of activity would operate at the gate, a simple combination padlock. Although it wasn’t uncommon for some of the maintenance people to work on the flightline, and they liked to take short cuts to Bentwaters or vice versa, because to drive the long way round was five or six miles. Between the two back gates was about three miles, And from time to time they would get the combination to the gate from the Security Police and figure out how to get the lock open.

So what we did was put a check on the Back Gate, entered in the log, and into the checklist of the patrolman on duty who had to go out every hour or every two hours to check the security of the Back Gate, to be sure that somebody hadn’t left it open, so that strangers couldn’t just wander into the base.

Burroughs had done this, Sgt. Burroughs had done this for probably about a year and a half or two years, and was familiar with the procedures. So was Sgt. Steffens. You ride down the East Gate Road, you check the gate, you rattle the gate, just like a bobby does when he walks down a street to make sure it’s closed. Then you make an entry in the log and go on.

Well, that night he rode down the road to the gate, and he asked Sgt. Burroughs to get out of the car. He’d noticed something in the forest, off the end of the runway. Giving him a nudge, his partner was half asleep, he said to him, ‘Bud, there’s something strange out there.’

So they both sat up to look, and as Burroughs described it, it looked like a helicopter or an aircraft had gone down. But it didn’t look like any aircraft or helicopter we knew, which was strange.

So he got out of the car, walked up to the gate, took a look. And what they saw was an object in the forest through the trees, that had red, white and blue lights, and they seemed to be pulsing. They beard no noise, nothing out of the ordinary, as far as sound.

They looked at it, for they were convinced it was something strange. And they didn’t think it was an aircraft crash, but they couldn’t rule that out. So they immediately went back up to the gate shack, rather than use their radio (they had hand-held radio). They got on the land line. Now we normally did this because an awful lot of people have scanners and liked to listen to our conversations. And sometimes it’s embarrassing. People say things on the air they shouldn’t. So, anytime there is any incident and they got a land line nearby, they always use the telephone.

They went up to the gate shack, picked up the telephone and Burroughs called Sgt. McCabe. He said, ‘There’s something in the woods, with funny lights on it. I don’t know what it is.’.

Well, McCabe thought it may be an airplane crash. Keep in mind this is restricted airspace. The area from RAF Woodbridge to RAF Bentwaters went from Bawdsey to the south up through Orford Ness, or the restricted site your government uses nuclear at Sizewell, uh, Sizewell nuclear plant, up the coast are all restricted. You can’t fly in that area unless you had business to, and prior approval. However, it’s still a possibility ...[unclear]...

However, Burroughs calls Sgt. McCabe on the Desk, he describes what he sees, and McCabe right away thinks this is a Christmas joke. He tells him, ‘All right, Burroughs, you pulled my leg good enough, you got me.’ He says, ‘No, I’m serious.’.

Well, McCabe still doesn’t believe him, so McCabe calls the other control center - the control center for security - Central Security Control, and talks to the controller there. And the two of them discuss it. And Sgt. McCabe thought when he said he was going to call Central Security Control, because they were more businesslike, more formal, a little stiffer, that would be the end of the joke. But Burroughs didn’t back off, so he knew there must be something out there.

Sgt. Coffey, the Controller in Central Security Control, called the Bentwaters Control tower, which they keep open 24 hrs a day in case there is an emergency and they have to use the field. Keep in mind, RAF Woodbridge had one of the largest airfields in Britain, if not the largest - over 300 feet wide. It was designed during World War II as a crash recovery base, the idea being you can crash two or three airplanes, and you can still keep the airfield open if you had to.

Sgt. Coffey called Bentwaters control tower and be also called Heathrow, London, and he asked them if they had any activity in the area, and if they had any problems in the area they knew about ...[unclear]... The word came back from them they were tracking something off the coast, both of them, east of that part of Woodbridge, and disappeared off the scope about 15 miles out. Well, this caused us great concern. Here’s the potential for something, unbeknownst, had maybe crashed back in the woods. They relayed that back to Burroughs.

In the meantime, Central Security Control despatched to Security 6, to Sgt. Tansing [not certain this is correct] Sgt. Penniston and the rider. Sgt. Penniston and the rider go Code 2. That means as fast as you can safely get here but no sirens and no lights. They race down to East Gate and join the two that are there, and they see the same thing.

Well, they can’t believe what they’re seeing. So they get back on the telephone again. They call Sgt. Coffey back. They say, ‘Look there’s definitely something out there. We got a problem here.’

They’re in a quandary. They don’t know what to do, because they don’t normally deal with this sort at thing. They don’t normally go off the installation.

Central Security Control sends a Master Sergeant down. The senior NCO on duty, Sgt. Chandler, comes down. He takes a look. He’s convinced there’s something out there. So he decides somebody should go out and take a good look at this, whatever it is. Sgt. Chandler says to Sgt. Steffens, who’s the next senior man, ‘I want you to take two people and go out into the forest.’, and Sgt. Steffens says ‘Oh no! Not me!! There’s something funny out there. I don’t want to go out there at all.’

So he turns to Sgt. Penniston, who works for him directly, and says, ‘Jim, I want you to take two people and go out there and take a look, and see what it is.’

So Sgt. Penniston and Airman Burroughs and Airman Cabansag were selected. They were somewhat unwilling to be involved in this but they had very little say in the matter.

Sgt. Chandler placed their weapons, parked them in the front of the car - you do not go off an installation with weapons - our policy, and your law. I guess, they take their radios, their flashlights, and Sgt. Penniston takes, the, uh, 35 mm camera. We kept cameras in front of some of the vehicles so we can record if there were an incident. Somebody runs to a vehicle when an airplane or some recruits climb over a fence. We take pictures. It’s always handy to have that facility so that we can reconstruct for a thorough investigation.

Well, Penniston puts the camera over his shoulder, and then drives down the East Gate road, then intersects the service road, paved road and the, uh, caravan site or something at the far end of it. Goes out the back l50 or 200 feet, turns down into the forest, watching this object all the time, and go about as tar as they can get without the vehicle, without risk of getting stuck.

At that point, they’re having terrible difficulties with the radios, the radios don’t always reach back to the Control Centers, and this is quite unusual because they are very powerful radios, at 5 Watts. They are in line of sight ...[unclear]... both their antennas are up extremely high. We do know there are a few dead spots, a few places around the base where you don’t get good communications but this place isn’t one of them. They had a great problem, so they throw Cabansag out of the truck when they stop, and say ‘You stay here and relay our conversations.’

Now Penniston and Burroughs were on two different radio nets. However, the radios have little switches to flip the channels back and forth. Then Cabansag gets out of the vehicle and the other two proceed on foot, Penniston and Burroughs. They go into the forest...
(End of extract)


Re: “I remember Kevin Conde. Good hard working man. As I recall my flight chief for a short period of time. How is he?”.

Surfing the ‘net, Conde had come across my related web site and recognised a striking similarity between some aspects of the UFO incidents and a hoax he perpetrated, “just after Christmas”, in 1980. Conde elucidated:

“I was a Security Policeman at RAF Bentwaters/Woodbridge from mid 1978 to mid 1981. I arrived at Bentwaters as a Staff-Sergeant and departed as a Tech-Sergeant. I was a Law Enforcement specialist. While there I worked as a patrolman, desk sergeant, assistant Flight Chief, Flight Chief, training NCO and QA evaluator”.

“My Shift Commander was Lieutenant Englund, and the Security Flight Chief at the time was Master-Sergeant Bobbie Ball. If I left QA six months before I left Bentwaters in the summer of 1981, and my Shift Commander was Lieutenant Englund... then my incident is right in the ball park”.

(...)

“We used at least three flashlights pointing upwards rolled up in the windows of the patrol car. These lights were red, blue, green, and possibly amber. The patrol car itself had the American style square red and blue emergency rack on top with revolving high intensity red and blue lights. It also had bright white alley lights - these are lights that point to the side in order to light up buildings as you drive past them at night. It also had a bright white spotlight that I pointed as close to straight up as I could. I had everything except my headlights on”.

“The flashlights, which were green, and maybe amber, where nowhere as bright as the red, blue and white emergency lights, which really lit up the night”.

“One of the lights directed upwards was the patrol car’s spotlight. It is a very bright light that throws a beam a long way”.

“We then proceeded to drive the car in slow circles while making weird noises over the PA system.

There was a light fog, which was the key to the joke’s success, as each light appeared in the fog as a moving beam of light.

(...)

“The joke would have had to have happened late - after all the initial patrol duties like relieving the main gate for chow, and getting the first round of building checks done, and before things began to pick up again, and we got bored and started looking for a way to cause trouble. I can not say for sure, but I would guess between 1:00 and 4:00 a.m.”.

“The night I did it I remember it as slightly foggy, probably low lying fog. The lights lit the fog quite nicely, I should think making a nice halo effect. The fog was, in fact, critical for my prank, as you could see the light beams. Try shining a bright spotlight in fog - you get the light sabre effect”.

“This was one of the more successful and hysterical practical jokes I participated in during my eleven years as a cop. One thing; I frankly don’t remember if we ever told the guy what really happened”.


Ian Ridpath has copies of contemporary base weather records which record ground fog on the night of 27 December.

In ‘UFO Crash Landing?’, Jenny Randles documents a witness, Sarah Richardson (only 12 at the time), who reportedly watched enigmatic bands of light, at the same time Halt was making a similar observation.

If it correlates with Conde’s east gate hoax, directly adjacent to the runway, we should find the witness observed at least three multicoloured and ever- changing beams of light in that location. Sarah remembers, “Three bands of light appeared over the woods to the side of the runway”.

She adds, “But the oddest thing was the colour changes, blue, green, yellow and so on”.

Jenny also notes that on the same night, local garage owner, Gerry Harris, reportedly observed, near east gate, “three separate lights” which sometimes “moved around in circles”.

(...)

The BBC East feature was broadcast on 30 June, 2003.

It had an impact, with newspaper coverage including a full page in the ‘Daily Mail’, entitled, ‘UFO-OLED!’.

I was BBC East’s consultant for that documentary and they agreed to fly Kevin back ‘home’. It was wonderful to meet him and somewhat fitting we had a memorable day’s filming in glorious Suffolk, summer weather.

How is he?

He’s a star:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/insideout/east/series3/rendlesham_ufos.shtml

Best wishes,

James Easton.
[END]


That link still works!
 
The aforenoted maps helpfully pinpoint Halt's location, with RAF Bentwaters effectively to the north and RAF Woodbridge due east.
On this page you will find an aerial view with the position of the supposed 'landing site' marked, and the two fields that Halt and his party crossed in their attempt to approach the flashing light.
http://www.ianridpath.com/ufo/rendlesham5b.html
Halt's quarters were at Bentwaters, to the north of Woodbridge, and from there he was used to seeing the lighthouse in the southeast, as he has often said. Hence when he saw it across the fields to the east he didn't recognize it.

Re the compass bearings: Remember that these are magnetic, so you need to adjust for the magnetic deviation on that date. Scroll down to the subhead "Compass bearing" on this page
http://www.ianridpath.com/ufo/rendlesham2a.html
which also explains why Halt didn't recognize the lighthouse when he saw it.
 
which also explains why Halt didn't recognize the lighthouse when he saw it.
Fantastic, thanks!

"Remember that these are magnetic, so you need to adjust for the magnetic deviation on that date".

:oops:

Can you download an app for this!? :)

Could you ever rationalise the contradiction between Halt's star-like object to the south and his perceived relationship to it being over RAF Woodbridge?
 
...extract from an email sent to Alan Cohen...
Simply a note that those observations re Kevin's practical joke were written nearly 20 years ago and naturally do not reflect subsequent developments concerning uncertainty about an exact correlation.

I had quite forgotten though, about what might... conceivably... be supporting evidence, as cited therein...

Having only just wished for this hoax aspect to go away, couldn't believe it happened to be that Alan was friendly with Kevin! :rolleyes:
 
"0069 may be the plane that crashed on approach to RAF Woodbridge, Suffolk, UK Dec 26/27, 1980".
Am I imagining this...

Wasn't there a circa early 1980s film about a aircraft crash landing at a USAF base in the UK and its subsequent cover-up by respective governments?

I thought it was called, 'Official Denial', or similar.

Could the later TV movie with that same name be based on the original?
 
Wasn't there a circa early 1980s film about a aircraft crash landing at a USAF base in the UK and its subsequent cover-up by respective governments?
I thought it was called, 'Official Denial', or similar.
This is Official Denial, from which Penniston most likely got his story about time travellers:
http://www.ianridpath.com/ufo/officialdenial.html
He liked watching SF films, according to his girlfriend at the time.

Or you might be thinking of Hangar 18, which was showing in Ipswich just before Christmas 1980, along with Close Encounters -- see the box at top right on this page:
http://www.ianridpath.com/ufo/rendlesham1b.html
 
Could you ever rationalise the contradiction between Halt's star-like object to the south and his perceived relationship to it being over RAF Woodbridge?
Not really a contradiction. He just got his directions slightly askew.
When he said 'Woodbridge base' I presume he meant the base buildings rather than the runway. From where he was standing, Woodbridge base was to the southwest. Hence when he spoke of an object hovering low to the south and losing height, he really meant to the southwest. This was where Sirius was setting. Similarly, the two starlike objects he described to the north were really to the northeast. Vega and Deneb were in that direction.
Full discussionl here
http://www.ianridpath.com/ufo/rendlesham3.html

Years later he changed his story to say that the brightest object was over Bentwaters rather than Woodbridge, but the tape tells us that it wasn't.
 
Not really a contradiction. He just got his directions slightly askew...

Years later he changed his story to say that the brightest object was over Bentwaters rather than Woodbridge, but the tape tells us that it wasn't.
That's tremendously helpful, thank you.

Yes, he most certainly did later change the location.

One related point I was able to clarify here previously, is that there was a weapons storage area at RAF Woodbridge, in addition to RAF Bentwaters, with Kevin Conde explaining:

"A little about the terms NMSA and WSA. WSA stands for Weapons Storage Area, while NMSA stands for Non-Nuclear Munitions Storage Area. Once the F-4's left Bentwaters and the A-10's moved in, Bentwaters had a WSA, while Woodbridge's area reverted to a NMSA. You can infer all you want about what the difference in names actually represents".
 
That's tremendously helpful, thank you.

Yes, he most certainly did later change the location.

One related point I was able to clarify here previously, is that there was a weapons storage area at RAF Woodbridge, in addition to RAF Bentwaters, with Kevin Conde explaining:

"A little about the terms NMSA and WSA. WSA stands for Weapons Storage Area, while NMSA stands for Non-Nuclear Munitions Storage Area. Once the F-4's left Bentwaters and the A-10's moved in, Bentwaters had a WSA, while Woodbridge's area reverted to a NMSA. You can infer all you want about what the difference in names actually represents".
I must be missing something, here: I thought the A-10 was the renowned tank-buster aircraft, as opposed to a nuclear bomber. If they were based at Bentwaters, what reason would there be for a WSA there? (Unless depleted uranium rounds are not considered non-nuclear...)
 
... Regarding John Howland's F-111A serial numbers:
"0069 may be the plane that crashed on approach to RAF Woodbridge, Suffolk, UK Dec 26/27, 1980. However, also reported as being at the Southern Museum of Flight, Birmingham, AL. ...
Although there's zero evidence of any aircraft crash being involved, I did hear rumour that an F-111E had lost a tactical nuke and this is what had been 'covered-up', as such. (End)
Unfortunately no and the trail went cold.

Aardvark (F-111) crashes were sadly common in the UK in 1979, but not in 1980.

No F-111 (of any sub-type) crashed in Suffolk in or around December 1980.

You may have been following a mistaken allusion to RAF Bentwaters being the site of an April 1980 F-111E crash. I found a single surviving online record reflecting this error:
General Dynamics F-111E Aardvark/68-0057
  • MSN: A1-226
  • Delivered to United States Air Force
  • Destroyed at Brentwaters (sic), UK, April 29, 1980.
  • Both crew killed.
http://forgottenjets.warbirdsresourcegroup.org/F-111_aarvark.html

Tail 68-0057 was actually operating out of Upper Heyford and crashed in Dorset.

http://web.archive.org/web/20170921...ry.org.uk:80/Aircraft_by_Type/F_111/F-111.htm
https://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/152997
 
Looks like the race is run on this case! Luckily there are many others.
I think a discussion of the Brazilian cases described by Vallee in his Confrontations would be interesting.
 
I think a discussion of the Brazilian cases described by Vallee in his Confrontations would be interesting.
I've not read that! Is there a description of the events online? I do think it is important to "never say never" with regards to UFO cases. UFOs are tricky things, if one can perform a thought experiment (even as a skeptic) and consider that they might represent a very advanced non-human technology, then they would be far more clever than we are.
 
I've not read that! Is there a description of the events online? I do think it is important to "never say never" with regards to UFO cases. UFOs are tricky things, if one can perform a thought experiment (even as a skeptic) and consider that they might represent a very advanced non-human technology, then they would be far more clever than we are.
I got a copy online, free of charge -- no longer possible it seems. Here's a link:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/wefz2p6ac...st's Search for Alien Contact (1990).pdf?dl=0
 
Aardvark (F-111) crashes were sadly common in the UK in 1979, but not in 1980.

No F-111 (of any sub-type) crashed in Suffolk in or around December 1980.

You may have been following a mistaken allusion to RAF Bentwaters being the site of an April 1980 F-111E crash. I found a single surviving online record reflecting this error:

http://forgottenjets.warbirdsresourcegroup.org/F-111_aarvark.html

Tail 68-0057 was actually operating out of Upper Heyford and crashed in Dorset.

http://web.archive.org/web/20170921...ry.org.uk:80/Aircraft_by_Type/F_111/F-111.htm
https://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/152997
That is quite fabulous research.

Given that the original post was on a site for studious military aviation enthusiasts and documenting the current whereabouts of aircraft via their, 'serial number' a common practice (plane spotting!), this had to be a genuine misunderstanding.

That surely is the explanation and a tangent resolved.

The source of another puzzling claim has also now been clarified, although not the veracity of same

I shall attend to that seperately, as I need to reference my original posting.
 
Back
Top