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

The Calvine UFO Sighting (Scotland; August 1990)

Sgt Girth said:
I don’t ever recall any A7 Corsair aircraft ever operating in UK airspace whereas the A10 Warthog was quite a regular visitor. ...
Click to expand...

The aircraft in the (presumably authentic) photos isn't a Warthog. Even the blurry, indistinct silhouette is sufficient to rule out an A-10.
 
Their estimate of the size of the object

"They hadn't gone far when they saw a huge, solid, diamond-shaped object, about 100ft long, hovering silently in the sky above them. Terrified, they hid in some bushes and looked up."

A Harrier GR5 is 46ft long:

https://pimaair.org/museum-aircraft/british-aerospace-harrier-gr-5/

Okay, a rough estimate maybe, but can anyone work out how far the object is from the camera?
 
Sgt Girth said:
If (and it may well be a big if) the Harrier was subsequently added to the image, then maybe I was shown an original unedited photograph when down the pit at Pitreavie Castle…….as I said earlier, I don’t even recall seeing an aircraft alongside the diamond shaped object.
Click to expand...

According to the (Clarke / Lindsay et al.) video the other aircraft (described only as a "jet") appears in different positions among the 6 original photos. It may be that the one you saw happened to be a shot in which the circling "jet" was out of frame or obscured behind / beyond the object. In the video there's a passing mention that there was one shot in which the "jet" was almost wholly obscured by the object.
 
Lord Lucan said:
Here's an hour long video on how the above photo known as 'The Calvine Photo' came to be 'found' again after all these years:

Click to expand...
Just had time to watch the full show. Fascinating. The two young men were not chefs but English seasonal kitchen porters. Clarke has been able to track down at least three members of staff who would have known them but they each state they don't remember anything. Quite a lot of other detail too and I believe the RAF chap checks out 100%.
 
eburacum said:
Another interesting aspect to this image is that it was taken on black and white film, but printed on colour film; the colours in the photo are a chromatic aberration. In other words - the colours in this image are not real.

Here's a detailed analysis by Andrew Robinson, of Sheffield Hallam University. Hallam have a large archive of UFO material, largely amassed by David Clarke.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1tWMZ232qgDE6Tru7jwgG-nsqoeQZpIm3/view

View attachment 57973
Click to expand...
Just to bump the photo analysis as it answers a few question....
 
Last edited:
EnolaGaia said:
According to the (Clarke / Lindsay et al.) video the other aircraft (described only as a "jet") appears in different positions among the 6 original photos. It may be that the one you saw happened to be a shot in which the circling "jet" was out of frame or obscured behind / beyond the object. In the video there's a passing mention that there was one shot in which the "jet" was almost wholly obscured by the object.
Click to expand...
Possibly……. I do wish I’d given the photo more scrutiny than I did……I had the feeling that the Flight Lieutenant showing it to me was interested in my reaction……I must have come across as quite indifferent to the whole thing.
 
The fact they were seasonal workers opens up the possibility that one or both of them studied photography at school/college, hence the use of b+w film that is favoured for landscape shots
 
Huge amount of discussion on the UFO subreddit of course. IMO this guy has nailed it.
https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/wntr6c

Bur others are welcome to disagree.

I think part of the counter-argument to the reflection theory is that the bottom half of the UFO does not mirror the top half. But that assumes the UFO was originally a thing sticking out of water, and that assumption could be a mistake.

I think it’s more likely toe a flat square piece of plastic or card floating on top of a pool, which has been coloured diagonally (like the anarchist flag).

That means a hoax, then.

A crying shame because I so wanted this to be real
 
Jutland said:
Huge amount of discussion on the UFO subreddit of course. IMO this guy has nailed it.
https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/wntr6c

Bur others are welcome to disagree.

I think part of the counter-argument to the reflection theory is that the bottom half of the UFO does not mirror the top half. But that assumes the UFO was originally a thing sticking out of water, and that assumption could be a mistake.

I think it’s more likely toe a flat square piece of plastic or card floating on top of a pool, which has been coloured diagonally (like the anarchist flag).

That means a hoax, then.

A crying shame because I so wanted this to be real
Click to expand...
Great find and an interesting theory. Explains the blurred background, too. Also found reference on David Clarke's twitter to a Puerto Rican hoax with an object and plane that are quite similar to the Calvine photo (click on image):

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1425853596881625088

However, it is already being pointed out that the analysis found an upward angle, not downward to a lake...
 
Last edited:
Paul_Exeter said:
However, it is already being pointed out that the analysis found an upward angle, not downward to a lake...
Click to expand...
That’s the same thing lol, because it’s a reflection.

Instead of photographing the whole scene, our photographer only photographs the reflection. He prints it out onto paper. And then he rotates the print 180 degrees, so that what was bottom is now top. It now seems that you are looking up, but that’s because the photo has been flipped.

Because the photo is (probably) a reflection, when it is flipped it looks like the camera is at ground level, looking up. The hoaxer had to come up with a reason for why the camera appeared to be held so close to the ground (“we were scared so we hid in a bush”).

But in reality he took the photo at normal head height, looking down towards the pond. IMO.
 
Jutland said:
That’s the same thing lol, because it’s a reflection.

Instead of photographing the whole scene, our photographer only photographs the reflection. He prints it out onto paper. And then he rotates the print 180 degrees, so that what was bottom is now top. It now seems that you are looking up, but that’s because the photo has been flipped.

Because the photo is (probably) a reflection, when it is flipped it looks like the camera is at ground level, looking up. The hoaxer had to come up with a reason for why the camera appeared to be held so close to the ground (“we were scared so we hid in a bush”).

But in reality he took the photo at normal head height, looking down towards the pond. IMO.
Click to expand...
This argument deserves greater analysis. I would dearly like to know if there was money involved when the negatives were handed to the Daily Record. David Clarke seems to think one witness name was written on the back of the newly-found original print, but then doesn't mention this in the conclusion so maybe enquiries are on-going
 
  • Like
Reactions: BS3
I don't think it particularly matters how the hoax was carried out - if it was a hoax. The 'reflection' idea is interesting, but proves nothing, and is probably unverifiable without a confession. The interest here was always in the MoJ response, which clearly shows they considered it possible the US could fly stuff around their airspace without letting them know.
 
BS3 said:
I don't think it particularly matters how the hoax was carried out - if it was a hoax. The 'reflection' idea is interesting, but proves nothing, and is probably unverifiable without a confession. The interest here was always in the MoJ response, which clearly shows they considered it possible the US could fly stuff around their airspace without letting them know.
Click to expand...
It would be interesting to know if the Daily Record ran an earlier, big UFO story that July or early-August
 
Sgt Girth said:
Sorry, but anyone that mixes up the Royal Air Force with the British Army really hasn’t done their research and loses much of their credibility as far as I’m concerned!
Click to expand...
Sorry but I don't know who those two groups are, and I was looking at the UFO info!
 
Paul_Exeter said:
It would be interesting to know if the Daily Record ran an earlier, big UFO story that July or early-August
Click to expand...

Allowing for a couple of months to filter through to the 'mainstream' press, I'm again wondering if there were any stories printed about the Belgian 'black triangle' / jet pursuit of earlier that year.
 
As a Royal Air Force veteran, I’m quite distressed to hear that you don’t know about the RAF…..but surely you must know about the British Army…..they’re quite famous…..LOL
 
Well, I guess now I know! LOL
We have Marines, the Navy and Air Force people also.
And thank you for your service!
 
'UAP Twitter' / Metabunk / reddit / etc seem to have lost their collective minds, predictably enough. I mean, although we've got a better quality copy of the picture, we're essentially in pretty much the same position we were a few years ago with this one!
 
BS3 said:
'UAP Twitter' / Metabunk / reddit / etc seem to have lost their collective minds, predictably enough. I mean, although we've got a better quality copy of the picture, we're essentially in pretty much the same position we were a few years ago with this one!
Click to expand...
The reason I stick to this forum is plain to see on those you have mentioned, with mud-slinging and name-calling obscuring any nuggets of information.

I can see a scenario where a young English student took photos of a still pond/lake with the interesting object that looks a bit like a mythical island. By happenstance a Harrier or two fly over and he catches their reflection in the pond/lake and it makes a 'cool' photo, especially as he was using black and white film. He then takes photos to his minimum wage kitchen porter summer job up in Scotland. Shows them to a someone local who agrees it looks like a UFO and suggests the Daily Record would pay good money for them and a hoax is born.

The ensuing 'panic' at the Mod was that the reflected object looks like a possible stealth project and the chance inclusion of the Harrier/s only serves to underline this. When pressed, the MoD were truthful in their denial that Harriers were operating in Scotland and actually that is where our young photography slipped up.

That our English photographer chose a job in the Scottish highlands and went off hill walking some distance from the hotel suggests to me he was familiar with such a landscape, so maybe he lived in somewhere in England like the Lake District or Peak District where the RAF are allowed to practice low-level flying...? It would also explain why he never kicked up a fuss that his photographs - considered the best in British UFO history - went missing or that he didn't ever pop up and say 'Oh by the way, here are some copies I made before I contacted the Daily Record'.

Anyway, its a theory....
 
Last edited:
Paul_Exeter said:
The reason I stick to this forum is plain to see on those you have mentioned, with mud-slinging and name-calling obscuring any nuggets of information.

I can see a scenario where a young English student took photos of a still pond/lake with the interesting object that looks a bit like a mythical island. By happenstance a Harrier or two fly over and he catches their reflection in the pond/lake and it makes a 'cool' photo, especially as he was using black and white film. He then takes photos to his minimum wage kitchen porter summer job up in Scotland. Shows them to a someone local who agrees it looks like a UFO and suggests the Daily Record would pay good money for them and a hoax is born.

The ensuing 'panic' at the Mod was that the reflected object looks like a possible stealth project and the chance inclusion of the Harrier/s only serves to underline this. When pressed, the MoD were truthful in their denial that Harriers were operating in Scotland and actually that is where our young photography slipped up.

That our English photographer chose a job in the Scottish highlands and went off hill walking some distance from the hotel suggests to me he was familiar with such a landscape, so maybe he lived in somewhere in England like the Lake District or Peak District where the RAF are allowed to practice low-level flying...? It would also explain why he never kicked up a fuss that his photographs - considered the best in British UFO history - went missing or that he didn't ever pop up and say 'Oh by the way, here are some copies I made before I contacted the Daily Record'.

Anyway, its a theory....
Click to expand...

I think this scenario, or a version of it, is very plausible. I do favour a hoax in this case as regards the photo itself - I think Clarke has taken that view in the past, though I appreciate from a journalistic standpoint he may want to emphasise other possibilities too. I think the 'reflection' theory doesn't work for a number of reasons, but again I'm not sure why people have got hung up on it as it's not that important: the truthfulness of the witness story is better judged through narrative inconsistencies anyway.

We're still really where we were at the time Clarke dug out the 'photocopy' version of the image some years back: missing witnesses, an intriguing but unclear image (and no sign of the others in the set), clear evidence of Civil Service and other 'interest', and rumours of off the record research projects. I'm not convinced the latter are the solution here (there was a prototype 'stealth blimp' being tested in 1990, but a very long way away) but that doesn't mean that governments haven't been happy to let stuff go under the cover of UFO stories, and I think that's a story that still needs to be told. We already know - as did the US authorities at the time - that the U2 was responsible for a lot of 1950s unknowns. Personally I could see secret projects being behind many more sightings - particularly those over the sea or at night; the kite-shaped thing supposedly seen by a lot of people around Windermere and Morecambe Bay one night in August 1977 seems a possible example, if it wasn't just a re-entry.
 
The 1989 Chris Gibson oil rig black triangle sighting deserves a mention:

Chris Gibson, an oil drill engineer, told Jane's he saw the aircraft from the rig Galveston Key in August 1989. A trained member of the Royal Observer Corps, he said that it was apparently refuelling from a KC-135 tanker and was escorted by two F- 111 bombers. Although high, it was clearly visible against high cloud.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/oil-rig-engineer-sketches-secret-us-spy-aircraft-1563429.html

And...

"In August 1989, Chris Gibson, a Scottish oil-exploration engineer and, at the time, a member of the British Royal Observer Corps (ROC), was working on the oil rig Galveston Key in the North Sea when he noticed an aircraft in the shape of a pure isoceles triangle refuelling from a KC-135 Stratotanker alongside two F-111s."

https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/threads/the-north-sea-aurora-sighting.2868/

His highly-reputable sighting took place off the north coast of England. He has drawn the object for documentaries and is clearly skilled at drawing aircraft for identification purposes. Does it look like the Calvine object? No, not much, but I do feel it is proof the US were flying prototype aircraft in the North Sea off England.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BS3
Paul_Exeter said:
The 1989 Chris Gibson oil rig black triangle sighting deserves a mention:

Chris Gibson, an oil drill engineer, told Jane's he saw the aircraft from the rig Galveston Key in August 1989. A trained member of the Royal Observer Corps, he said that it was apparently refuelling from a KC-135 tanker and was escorted by two F- 111 bombers. Although high, it was clearly visible against high cloud.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/oil-rig-engineer-sketches-secret-us-spy-aircraft-1563429.html

And...

"In August 1989, Chris Gibson, a Scottish oil-exploration engineer and, at the time, a member of the British Royal Observer Corps (ROC), was working on the oil rig Galveston Key in the North Sea when he noticed an aircraft in the shape of a pure isoceles triangle refuelling from a KC-135 Stratotanker alongside two F-111s."

https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/threads/the-north-sea-aurora-sighting.2868/

His highly-reputable sighting took place off the north coast of England. He has drawn the object for documentaries and is clearly skilled at drawing aircraft for identification purposes. Does it look like the Calvine object? No, not much, but I do feel it is proof the US were flying prototype aircraft in the North Sea off England.
Click to expand...

That forum has some fascinating theories about what people might have been seeing, eg:

personal opinion is that the aircraft that Gibson spotted was the Lockheed "Quartz" project. This supposedly was a fairly large subsonic testbed aircraft, which was built to test out some very sophisticated (and expensive) stealth technology. Like the Have Blues and most other "black" projects, it was never designed or built to be an operational aircraft. It was put together quickly from mostly existing components, and the airframe was designed specifically to test out whatever the fancy technology was. It was not a hypersonic or even supersonic plane, although it may have been a very sleek looking delta shape. Its flights were probably long, boring test runs across the open ocean, and F-111's would have been sensible chase planes.

My own speculation is that the Quartz project ran for maybe a decade total, made a bunch of test flights with one or two airframes, and the technology was generally proven successful. Lockheed's hope was to transition it into a contract to design and build a small fleet of very stealthy recon planes to replace the TR-1's and SR-71's. The idea was super stealth rather than super speed. But it never happened. Either the technology was too expensive, or the customer couldn't figure out an operational requirement to get the program together, or whatever. So, as with most black projects, parts of the technology were used on other projects, and any remaining airframes were mothballed or cut up.

I believe that the "Aurora" project never existed, in the form that Bill Sweetman and the common stories have it. The myth is put together from scraps of info about different projects, plus some very wishful thinking. I'm sure there were (or are) a few black projects working on experimental powerplant development for high speed planes. But they're mostly aimed at future hypersonic drones and cruise missiles. Whatever has been occasionally cracking the sky and leaving funny trails is most likely a testbed aircraft, built purely for engine testing
Click to expand...
 
BS3 said:
That forum has some fascinating theories about what people might have been seeing, eg:
Click to expand...
Great find.

I just can't understand why a piloted secret US aircraft would end up above Calvine with an RAF Harrier of all things.There was the claim from the witnesses that the Harrier went for a close look at the object, well there you have a trained observer reporting the object at then time it was seen, would have had a great view as he circled the object, probably took some images himself, so why were the MoD evidently so surprised to see the photos days later...? Ditto, if the Harrier was escorting the US aircraft, why was a three-star general at the Pentagon tearing his hair out in the belief the Brits were copying US technology...?*

*David Clarke spoke in person to the unfortunate British diplomat on the receiving end of the general's fury

Edit: RAF Harriers had cameras, including infra-red capability, so to my mind it is inconceivable that the pilot didn't capture some serious footage of the object as he circled it (according to the witnesses). This would have been closer and of a much better quality than the lad's camera.

I'm feeling it's not the object that's the problem - a photo of a stationary object that may or not be airborne - it's the Harrier and its role in this case, and my money is still on either a clever or accidental hoax...
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: BS3
Anyway, moving on because there is a new suggestion in this link below that includes a chat Clarke had with Air Commodore Simon Baldwin, the man summoned to meet the angry US three star general. The suggestion, which I find just so deliciously ironic, is that the boys were attempting a …..


….rather poor Nessie hoax :) I mean, look, it’s a classic Nessie hump…. However, the reflection of a Harrier got caught in the shots and bingo, it became a UFO…!

How did the Harrier get there? Well maybe the Nessie hoax was perpetrated in England before they left for Scotland, after all suspicions activity around Loch Ness would draw attention….

https://drdavidclarke.co.uk/2021/07/31/the-ufo-that-never-was-the-calvine-photographs/

My god, you could make a film about it: two teenage boys messing around with a camera to hoax Nessie - and quite badly - manage to create the Calvine UFO….

Could it be…? I have to say I like the simplicity of the whole premise….
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top