Not heard of that one before - I can't find many references in English other than in a book by Salas (of Malmstrom AFB fame). His source seems to be the following account, now only available via archive.org:
https://web.archive.org/web/20160403060123/www.ufowijzer.nl/tekstpagina/Soesterberg.html
Translates ok through Google.
Here's the Google translation of the archived webpage ...
SOURCE:
UFO BOVEN VLIEGBASIS SOESTERBERG
Is er mogelijk een vergelijking met de latere Belgische gevallen?
https://web.archive.org/web/20160403060123/www.ufowijzer.nl/tekstpagina/Soesterberg.html
UFO OVER FLY BASE SOESTERBERG
Is there possibly a comparison with the later Belgian cases?
I received the following UFO incident from a loyal visitor to UFOwijzer and he wondered whether a comparison can be made with the later Belgian observations of triangles. The matches are shown in bold/italics in this article.
Soesterberg, February 3, 1979
The report of this UFO sighting over Soesterberg Air Base in the morning of Saturday 3 February 1979 was further investigated by three members of the NOBOVO working group, including Dr. W. de Graaff, who works at the Astronomical Institute in Utrecht, and advisor to NOBOVO. It turned out that there were two different flights of lights above the base, which flights were observed by a total of five different posts spread over the site of the base, each manned by two or more soldiers.
The phenomenon was first seen at a quarter to six and lasted a total of five to six minutes. It was seen successively by Post A to the west, Post B to the northeast, Post C to the north, Post D to the northwest, and Post E to the southwest of the base. The mutual distance between the posts was 1 to 3 kilometers.
First pass sighting
Post A reported at 5:45 am sharp that she saw three bright white lights shining over an open strip of ground to the east. The two outer lights were about the same height above the ground; the third light, midway between the other two, was slightly higher. The bright beams emanating from the lights, directed downwards, converged on the ground. The lights approached slowly and after a few minutes came right over the post, with the observers drifting into the beams for a few moments. During the passage, a fourth red light, larger than the white lights, was found in the center behind the white lights, emitting a beam directed straight down. Immediately after the passage, the lights behind the trees disappeared from view.
Post B saw the lights in the south, near the open strip, almost immediately after the first radio report from Post A. The estimated height relative to the horizon was 10 to 15 degrees. It was clear to see that the obliquely downward beams illuminated the ground. Since the field of view was small, the lights were only visible for a few moments. Combining both observations, which apparently related to the same phenomenon, results in a flight altitude of 150 to 200 meters and an average speed of 50 to 100 km per hour. The passage has only been observed through stations A and B.
Second pass observation
Post C at one point saw the lights pass between the trees from very close range for a few seconds. The time was too short for a clear observation and especially these people were very impressed by what they saw.
Post D was initially unable to see anything after the first report from Post A (it turned out afterwards that they had not been able to see the passage due to the existing afforestation). After the later reports from Posts A and B, they looked again and saw the lights approaching from the direction of Post C in the northeast. Post D also first saw three large spheres. The middle one a little higher than the others, which emitted a bright white light. Surrounded by a prominent black border, the spheres initially radiated straight toward the observers. Although the beams were bright, it was possible to look into them without glare, unlike with car or airplane headlights.
The lights made a slight curve and passed the observers on the right at a distance of about 100 meters and a height of about 50 meters (estimates from further runway analysis). The 'reddish taillight' also became visible, with the beam pointing straight down, the edge of which passed the observers at a few tens of meters. Then the lights disappeared low above the ground in a southerly direction, the beams clearly illuminating the ground as they passed. At one point the lights could be seen even lower than the lanterns at the back of the field, so they must have been just above the ground. After the lights approached station E, a flash of light was seen; the white lights flickered out and the red light disappeared into the clouds with increasing speed through a right-hand bend. All in all, station D was able to follow the lights for a distance of 2 to 2½ km.
Finally, Post E saw the lights over the treetops coming straight for him from the north. They too saw the flash of light. After the lights went out, the red light disappeared with great speed in a westerly direction.
Due to its position, Post B was unable to observe the second passage. Post A would have been able to do that from its original position, but the observers involved had gone into the woods after the lights went out at the passage to see if they could see them further up.
Further details
Shape: all observations, taking into account the direction from which the lights are seen, seem to correspond to an arrangement of three white lights and one red light in the shape of a somewhat blunt kite. The white lights were at the ends of the 'crossbar' and at the top tip of the 'kite', while the red light was at the bottom tip. Dark outlines connecting the white lights have been seen by some observers, while behind the triangle thus formed is a dark rectangle, the red light of which was at the back.
The lights themselves must have had a diameter of several metres, with the red light being larger than the white lights. The distance between the two outer white lights was estimated to be over 50 meters.
The white lights seemed encased or surrounded by a clearly visible dark border, and their skewed beams converged in the air or on the ground. The red 'taillight' beamed straight down.
Movement: On the first pass, the lights must have moved from east to west for a distance of approximately 3 km above the base at an average speed of 50 to 100 km per hour. On the second pass, the lights approached from the northeast, soon made a slight curve more to the south, then after the white lights went out on reaching the southwest rim of the base, the red light turned steeply into westward disappeared.
Although the lights must have flown at varying speeds (sometimes they appeared to be stationary), this distance of about 3 km must also have been covered at a comparable average speed as the first time.
Sound: None of the posts heard any sound, at least no significant sound, while approaching and passing the lights. After passing, all stations, except station C (diffused by the own engine noise of the own vehicle), heard a very soft buzzing sound. The observers from station D entered shortly after passing and disappearing of the lights; the other stations still heard this noise about an hour after the sighting.
Radar: No unusual phenomenon was recorded on the base's radar during either pass. Radar posts in the area have also detected nothing unusual. (Now we know from a number of witnesses in the Disclosure Project that when asked whether something special was observed on the radar, the standard answer is: "No, we have not seen anything special." That would also be true for a Dutch military base. are the standard rule. But it regularly turns out that UFOs, for whatever reason, are indeed not visible on the radar.
Weather: the ground temperature at the time of the observations was about -1 degree Celsius. The humidity was 77% and there was a wind blowing at a speed of about 10 miles per hour from the northwest. It was completely cloudy (no stars, no moon) with a visibility of about 25 km. The base of the cloud cover was at about 1500 meters and temperature inversions occurred at altitudes of about 250 and about 2000 meters.
Analysis of the notifications
A comparison of all reports shows that that morning the area of Soesterberg airbase must have been visited twice by a system of lights. From the reported similarities between the two light systems and from the fact that the two passages took place shortly after each other, one gets the impression that both cases involved the same system of lights, although this cannot be stated with absolute certainty (in this context it is reminded that none of the five posts has seen both passages).
An initial response from the Air Force talked about the possibility that the observers saw REFLECTION OF CAR HEADLIGHTS against the reflective layers of air that occur during inversions. However, this statement seems to contradict the statement of the various posts that they saw the lights go almost straight over them and were in the light beams. At the beginning of the flight period, post A and post B saw the lights simultaneously in nearly perpendicular directions (eastern and southern respectively), which seems difficult to explain in the case of reflections. Also the statement from station D that the lights were at one point lower than objects visible behind them on the other side of the field over which they were moving, seems to contradict this statement.
The observers concerned are very firm in their statement that it cannot have been a known or normal type of AIRCRAFT OR HELICOPTER which caused the phenomena. The lights looked very different than people are used to from such devices and that was also the case with the dark contours. The lack of overflight noise and of radar sightings (while, according to base spokesmen, the radar would certainly have registered a normal aircraft following these runways) seems to support this statement by the observers.
The general circumstances under which the observations must have taken place and the way in which the observers reacted to them (in some cases fearful, in other cases resistance to talking about them for fear of being ridiculed) suggest the possibility that this was a JOKE SCENE. was going to rule out. Also, the likelihood of COLLECTIVE GLASSES seems negligible because the observers were in different posts and their reports nevertheless provided a surprisingly coherent picture, although there was no contact between them during the second pass.
In view of the nature of the descriptions, this seems to be a TECHNICAL PHENOMENON rather than a natural or psychological phenomenon. For the time being, it remains unclear what kind of technical phenomenon this could be. It is noted by the airbase's official position that the matter is considered closed and further responses to it will be referred to the NOBOVO Working Group.
Conclusion
"On the basis of the currently available data, it must be established that the Soesterberg base was visited on February 3, 1979 by an unknown, airborne system of lights, and that this is therefore a clear UFO report."
So much for the very extensive report of the Working Group NOBOVO, which was drawn up as a result of the observation. The members of this working group were authorized by the authorities to speak with the witnesses and investigate the matter at the airport itself. The NOBOVO is therefore of the opinion that the observation cannot be explained at the moment.
Hans van Kampen, however, is not. He also investigated the case and came to an entirely different conclusion, namely that the witnesses saw an airplane flying over.
Note ufo pointer
This is a very remarkable conclusion of one of Dutch well-known ufologists, Hans van Kampen. Is it really that hard to admit that things are flying through the skies that are absolutely not attributable to terrestrial aircraft? It doesn't necessarily have to be extraterrestrial, but at least you could admit that it is inexplicable and a lot of details, also from the above observation, do indicate that. Why Hans van Kampen suddenly visits the camp of the skeptics is a mystery to me. I will not fully reproduce the radio interview below between the well-known Chriet Titulaer (discussion leader), Hans van Kampen and Willem Kuiper. It's an inimitable discussion, but I'll make some comments. Even the discussion leader, Chriet Titulaer, not exactly a UFO advocate, almost audibly raises eyebrows at Van Kampen's opinion and that seems to me a justified response.
A brief excerpt from the radio discussion follows on this remarkable disagreement:
Chriet Titulaer: 'Hans, what do you think is the explanation for Soesterberg?'
Hans van Kampen: 'A German business jet that flew over the field.'
ch. T.: "Without sound?"
H.v.K.: "Without sound. This is possible under certain atmospheric conditions, at a fairly high altitude.
ch. T.: "Didn't he just turn off the engine?
Willem Kuiper: 'I think this is a typical example of eh… I'm sorry Hans, I don't want to hurt you, but…
(Then buzz. Speakers talk at the same time)
The rest of the discussion is blaming each other and making irrelevant so-called technical remarks, at the end Chriet intervenes with the following remark:
ch. T.: "Gentlemen, I'm really cutting it off, aren't I?
The K.L.V. At the time, the staff pool 'De Vliegende Hollander' paid attention to the observation:
UFOs ABOVE SOESTERBERG
October 1979
On February 3 of this year at a quarter to six in the morning, Soesterberg was quite haunted. The five sentries around the field, each consisting of two men, didn't know what they saw when they saw what. Suddenly lights all around, disappearing and coming back again, over the trees, in between and even close to some of those posts. The strange phenomenon lasted for a total of five to six minutes, after which everything was back to normal. Except of course the LB soldiers who had observed the strange. UFOs was their first thought.
“Yes, UFOs,” says a research team from the NOBOVO working group. In the latest issue of the 'Magazine for Ufology' that this group publishes, she reports on the investigation she has launched into this appearance case. On more than six pages, these white and red orbs and beams are measured, which have been pulled over the base at calculated varying speeds of 50 to 100 km per hour. Sometimes they also seemed to stand still. The flight altitude must have been 150 to 200 meters. It wasn't airplanes, it wasn't helicopters, it wasn't car headlights, it wasn't a staged joke, it wasn't a collective delusion. “Given the nature of the descriptions, there seems to be a technical phenomenon here rather than a natural or psychological phenomenon. For the time being, it remains unclear what kind of technical phenomenon this could be," says NOBOVO in its report. Her conclusion is: “On the basis of the data currently available, it must be established that the Soesterberg base was visited on February 3, 1979 by an unknown, air-moving system of lights, and that this is therefore a clear UFO sighting. notification."
A conclusion that is not wrong. A technical phenomenon means that there has been something that has been created through technology by beings - whoever they are - and sent out by those beings on a mission. For example to Soesterberg. The working group expresses its gratitude to the basic personnel for the cooperation obtained in the investigation. “This acknowledgment does not imply that the Air Force or any member of its personnel would be liable for the above analysis or conclusions. These are of course the responsibility of the aforementioned researchers.” And we'll stop there.
The link to an article about the Belgian triangles: EUPENSE GARDIGANS OBSERVE BLACK TRIANGLES
(
https://web.archive.org/web/2016030...owijzer.nl/tekstpagina/BelgischeUFOgolf1.html)
Update May 22, 2012
I (Paul Harmans - ufowijzer) received the following email from a loyal visitor of my website on May 12, 2012:
Dear Paul,
Something about this very important Soesterberg ufo case for the Netherlands (The Dutch Rendlesham Forest Case?).
I want to point you to the google video: OVNIS Triangulares Canadá, by Jaime Maussan. In this movie the same light configuration (ufo) can be seen as at the time in Soesterberg, but in Canada in 2011 !! namely the “blunt kite” with the red light at the end. (Although according to a number of observations the red light can detach and move from the carrier/triangle).
I thought this was bizarre and worth reporting this to you after about thirty years of intervening time of these reports! Something else about the "bad tongues" broadcast: in this an ex-air force soldier speaks, and shows that soldiers never talked about these kinds of things (this was secret!). Now it happens that this so-called ufo case was reported long and widely in the klu.staff magazine "De Vliegende Hollander"! Which, besides for Klu.staff, was also for sale in the magazine shops, yes, I believe it was even mentioned in the newspapers! (why so interesting by this ex-military??).
bad tongues - RTV Utrecht broadcast 11 Feb. 2012 about UFOs over Soesterberg
I heard from a colleague of mine (former air force dog guard), who was in military service at the time of the Belgian sightings, that he heard his colleagues talk about that something like this had also happened on Soesterberg (so there was spoken).
What I also find a pity is that the Soesterberg witnesses have never been publicized again, after the Belgian observations, what then. should be easily accessible in terms of being able to tell your story to someone (except of course the established media of today!) This in contrast to Rendlesham Forest/Belgian soldiers/gendarmes etc.
I also found a nice article on the UFO casebook about the flight characteristics of these triangles. If you click on
http://www.ufocasebook.com/trianglescharacteristics.html you will find it. Perhaps this is another useful addition to your article?
Well, I just wanted to say this, until this post.
Finally, I want to wish you good luck with this very good ufowijzer site!
Regards,
Henk Philippa
