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

The Morayshire Entity (May 18th 1977)

BS3

BS3

Abominable Showman
Joined
Sep 20, 2021
Messages
1,869
We've had great fun with the Rainford case, so I thought I'd highlight another bit of typical 1970s weirdness from Jenny Randles in Flying Saucer Review, then in its 'classic' era edited by Charles Bowen.

Screenshot_20230905-224356_Drive.jpg




Screenshot_20230905-224424_Drive.jpg


Some very Broad Haven aspects to this one. Also, in this largely forgotten case we have:

- Two named witnesses
- Further adult witnesses to the strange noise the machine made
- A tall, silver-suited occupant (who may even have had short arms, for fans of the Rainford thing)
- The 'craft' taking off
- A concurrent flap in the UK

My first impression is that the children might have seen, as at Broad Haven, some sort of vehicle which fright and the contemporary background of saucer stories transformed into a spacecraft, but it's all grist to the mill.
 
Last edited:
It’s an interesting account that I had never heard of before. Although the author is at pains to point out the remoteness of Elgin, it is worth pointing out that Elgin is the county seat of Moray and even in the 1977 it was the largest settlement in the county; it isn’t some wild and sparsely populated glen. The countryside around the town is fairly flat, open farmland with long sandy beaches on the coast. New Elgin is a residential suburb of Elgin that was rapidly expanding in the 1970s.

Finally, Elgin is just five miles from RAF Lossiemouth and ten miles from RAF Kinloss. The air force is a big player locally. Both Kinloss and Lossiemouth were very busy flying stations in 1977 (Lossie still is but Kinloss was handed over to the Army in 2012, though it is maintained as a diversionary airfield) and many of the RAF personnel and families lived in Elgin - especially in the growing suburbs like New Elgin - if they didn’t have accomodation on the bases.
 
Last edited:
Carse said:
It’s an interesting account that I had never heard of before. Although the author is at pains to point out the remoteness of Elgin, it is worth pointing out that Elgin is the county seat of Moray and even in the 1977 it was the largest settlement in the county; it isn’t some wild and sparsely populated glen. The countryside around the town is fairly flat, open farmland with long sandy beaches on the coast. New Elgin is a residential suburb of Elgin that was rapidly expanding in the 1970s.

Finally, Elgin is just five miles from RAF Lossiemouth and ten miles from RAF Kinloss. The air force is a big player locally. Both Kinloss and Lossiemouth were very busy flying stations in 1977 (Lossie still is but Kinloss was handed over to the Army in 2012, though it is maintained as a diversionary airfield) and many of the RAF personnel and families lived in Elgin - especially in the growing suburbs like New Elgin - if they didn’t have accomodation on the bases.
Click to expand...

The RAF link might be important. I've always had a suspicion that at least some of the UFO and occupant reports from Pembrokeshire in 1977 might have been connected to a programme of unadvertised off-base exercises, in that the witnesses were actually misperceiving helicopters, flares, RAF personnel, etc in unexpected situations. The September 1978 case from Llanerchymedd in Anglesey (various reports here) seems almost certainly due to misperception of some kind of secret off-base exercise like this.

And if the military were doing this in Wales, why not in Scotland in the same period? The noise sounded a bit like a helicopter - perhaps that's exactly what they were seeing?
 
The locus is described as “fields with adjacent woods.” Why would a helicopter crew, in an apparently-intact machine, choose to land/hover in woods when there was a field yards away?

maximus otter
 
Because they were practising landing and takeoff in clearing, adjacent to trees, etc?
 
maximus otter said:
Near a housing estate, where kids play? The armed forces have tens of thousands of acres of training areas for that kind of thing.

maximus otter
Click to expand...

I agree, but...this is what seemed to be happening at Llanerchymedd too, and even BUFORA thought that one could be a military exercise.
 
Other thoughts: forestry or farming equipment. But forestry equipment doesn't tend to take off vertically at "terrific speed", which is the thing that makes this potentially more interesting than the otherwise similar Broad Haven.

I'm pretty stumped so far; you could say it was a story by two bored, imaginative children, but the local policeman confirmed they'd given the same story to him, and their parents confirmed hearing the odd sound, at least.

The only thing that comes to mind is that the children could have seen a 'craft' and 'entity' on the ground but while retelling their story elaborated the detail about seeing it leave, in that way witnesses will often subconsciously try to strengthen weak points in their story.
 
I've managed to track down the case in Peter Rogerson's Intcat, which gives further details (including a "threatening phone call") and a list of additional sources:

May 18 1977. 1830hrs.
NEW ELGIN (MORAYSHIRE : SCOTLAND)
Karen McLennan and Fiona Morrison (both 10) were playing near an old disused railway track behind a pub when they heard a strange humming noise. They went to a wooded area to investigate, and saw in front of the fence around the woods a long (c10m) cylindrical object with rounded ends and a small dome on top. The object was a polished metallic colour, with no visible markings nor openings. On top was a steady red light. In the centre of the lower section was a red band, about one quarter the width of this portion, which appeared to be rotating. The object was about 400m away, hovering about 60cm above the ground, straggling the depression of the old track. By the side of the object was a silvery figure 1.8m tall, dressed all over in a silver suit, with a row of silver buttons down the front. It was quite thin and no facial features were visible. They were confused about its arms, describing them both as unusually short and unusually long. When the figure started to move towards them, the girls fled. After some seconds they looked back and the being had gone, and the object took off to the right in three jerky steps. Both girls’ mothers, Mrs Caroline and McLennan and Mrs Maureen Morrison had heard the sound even though Caroline was deaf in one ear. Next day Caroline and the children found an area of damaged trees about 100m diameter. Samples were taken but these got lost in the post. The girls did not report the matter to their mothers until the next day. Caroline later received a threatening phone call and saw lights moving over the site at night. A neighbour also heard the sound.
  • Jenny Randles in FSR 23,4 p.7 citing investigation by Bryan Hartley and Constable Grant
  • Patricia Donaldson in FSR 26,2 p31 citing own investigation
  • West and Jefferis 1978 p.70
  • Halliday 1997 p72
  • Randles 1992 (Entity)
 
A few things come to mind from the Donaldson article.

The site was not exactly remote, although looking at the surrounding houses it's clear that all those to the East are quite recent and it is now much more suburban than it was in 1977. In that time the pub ("The Cottar Hoose", not the "Coter House" as Donaldson has it) would have been on the edge of fields and woods. The area was beginning to suburbanise though (interestingly, recently suburbanised rural fringe areas are most likely to experience UFO flaps).

The big thing of course is that despite the environment and several witnesses to the humming sound, no-one else seems to have witnessed the object shooting into the sky.

The whole experience was a little bit more High Strangeness than Randles suggests, with a threatening phone call to one of the parents (in fairness, probably a random nutter as the case seems to have got some press traction) and continuing sightings of lights on the landing site. The fact that the children did not report the sighting until the next day, but couldn't explain why, is strange to say the least, and it might be worth checking the TV schedules in the period to see if there's anything that could have influenced the children to elaborate a previous but more mundane event before only then reporting it.

The parents (though not the children - very sensible) developed some interest in UFOs afterwards.
 
The 'jerky take off' reminds me of remote controlled vehicles, where it can take a while to get your eye in and get the thing flying straight.
 
I was just wondering what the noise signified, as that was something very prominent in the witness accounts. Like a helicopter but "softer"? "Humming"? "Like a vacuum cleaner"? The last makes me think of a hovercraft, almost.
 
If they were quite far away I'm surprised they distinguished the silver 'buttons' down the front of the entity's clothing. Just a thought, had The Wizard of Oz been broadcast recently?
 
Great case to revisit @BS3.

I think we should all take note of the discrepancies between the FSR sketch and the findings from the site visit as I feel sometimes are opinions are overly-influenced by such sketches in this and other journals and reports of the time and that did not originate from the actual witnesses themselves.

On reading of the jerky take-off I immediately thought of a parachute being tugged by the wind and then breaking free. I note the weather conditions are not mentioned and this seems a curious omission.

The contradiction about the arms seems to be key here, why the confusion? After all, they ere able to see and recall the buttons. A skeptic might argue this is because they were drawing on their collective memories of a fictional character from a book, tv or a film. Alternatively, diid the humanoid raise and lower its arms, making them appear shorter and then longer? That row of silver buttons is indeed very Wizard of Oz tin man, but as ever there is the counter argument that their young minds were searching for images from their memories to explain the completely alien humanoid in front of them (in this aspect it has parallels with our friend 'All Colours Sam' from the Isle of Wight).

The UFO itself is very of its time, with the trademark red light on top and could have come out of any comic book or tv show. Polished metal is the colour of civilian aircraft that want to be seen rather than military aircraft that don't and therefore military helicopters are painted in variations of green etc.

The Royal Navy were experimenting with hovercrafts for fishery protection off Scotland in 1978:

"A Royal Navy hovercraft has recently been engaged experimentally on fishery protection work off Scotland and officers from my Department have been aboard on a number of patrols. This type of craft has limitations as a general purpose fishery protection vessel. Its suitability for specific limited tasks is still under consideration."

https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commo...10-448a-baf7-8625cd6ebe9e/FisheriesProtection

So it is possible a hovercraft had featured on a Scottish new programme or children's tv show in 1978, will have to look into this further. Hovercrafts were certainly exciting 'future' technology in the 1970s.
 
The polished metal UFO with red light is extremely similar to Broad Haven, which would have been splashed across the news only months earlier.
 
Okay, some more on hovercrafts in Scotland both before and after 1977:

https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/18931568.remember-scotlands-ill-fated-love-affair-hovercraft/

Of particular interest is the Clyde Hover Ferry that operated during the 1960s, which was before these girls were born, but note the red band across the length of the craft:

https://www.pinterest.co.uk/pin/a-hover-ferry-at-rothesay-in-1965--397231629608570429/

Not suggesting a hovercraft somehow landed on that disused railway but the sound may have triggered a memory and the girls picked up on talk of hovercraft.
 
BS3 said:
The polished metal UFO with red light is extremely similar to Broad Haven, which would have been splashed across the news only months earlier.
Click to expand...
As is the single humanoid figure. Actually invented by one of the children who didn't even see the 'UFO' but was nonetheless directed to draw what he hadn't witnessed when back at school the following Monday and actually drew Mr Spock and told researchers he had seen Mr Spock.

I still don't understand why such significance is given to this Broad Haven sighting when so much else was going on at the time, whilst there was the core sighting a lot of it was invented by the children several days later.

Anyway, back to this case, my reading of this data is that it was quite windy in the wider area that day:

https://weatherspark.com/h/d/147764...-Lossiemouth-United-Kingdom#Figures-WindSpeed
 
Last edited:
So test ejection seat parachutes are red and white and might have a dummy payload attached:

https://www.afcent.af.mil/News/Arti...s-at-new-parachute-for-aces-ii-ejection-seat/

Given the proximity of military airbases could this have been one such errant parachute caught by a bush and then pulled free by the wind? Not the side on profile of the canopy could be interpreted as dome shaped.

Another thought, when prop aircraft ascend for parachute drops they make quite a racket as they use full power whilst in an upward spiral. Could this have been the noise they were hearing? We have had complaints about this down here in Cornwall.
 
Paul_Exeter said:
Another thought, when prop aircraft ascend for parachute drops they make quite a racket as they use full power whilst in an upward spiral. Could this have been the noise they were hearing? We have had complaints about this down here in Cornwall.
Click to expand...
One thing that occurred to me is at the time of this encounter, RAF Lossiemouth hosted the headquarters detachment of 849 Naval Air Squadron, Fleet Air Arm. They operated the Fairey Gannet AEW.3 aircraft on anti-submarine warfare patrols. The Gannet was a funny looking dumpy little aircraft with folding wings, a large bulbous radome on the underside and two contra-rotating propellers one in front of the other, which produced an unusual and distinctive sound.

IMG_7332.jpeg
If the top of the fuselage were red rather than blue then I’d almost be tempted to say there’s your saucer…
 
Paul_Exeter said:
The contradiction about the arms seems to be key here, why the confusion?
Click to expand...
I am not sure that there is really any confusion here. The wording in the original report is this:-

A vivid description from Karen is that he looked rather like a telegraph pole. (This means that the impression was that his arms were disproportionately short)
Click to expand...

This reads to me like the person interpreting her description has taken it to mean that his arms were short. She may have just meant that he was very tall and thin.
 
Min Bannister said:
I am not sure that there is really any confusion here. The wording in the original report is this:-



This reads to me like the person interpreting her description has taken it to mean that his arms were short. She may have just meant that he was very tall and thin.
Click to expand...
The "telegraph pole" may have been the parachute payload being pulled upright as the chute itself was being tugged by the wind. They only actually viewed the 'UFO and humanoid' for thirty seconds out of the minute they were there before departing.
 
Carse said:
One thing that occurred to me is at the time of this encounter, RAF Lossiemouth hosted the headquarters detachment of 849 Naval Air Squadron, Fleet Air Arm. They operated the Fairey Gannet AEW.3 aircraft on anti-submarine warfare patrols. The Gannet was a funny looking dumpy little aircraft with folding wings, a large bulbous radome on the underside and two contra-rotating propellers one in front of the other, which produced an unusual and distinctive sound.

View attachment 69478
If the top of the fuselage were red rather than blue then I’d almost be tempted to say there’s your saucer…
Click to expand...
Good shout, you might make arguments here for some sort of mirage effect in play that made the low-flying aircraft appear to be hovering 400 yards away, especially given the brevity of the sighting
 
One detail that interests me from Donaldson's article is that the object supposedly "straddled" the trackbed of the railway line, resting on the grassy sides of the cutting on each side (with the caveat that this detail seems to have emerged some time after the sighting itself, so memories may have changed). This rather odd positioning seems to rule out most vehicles - though a stray parachute might still be one possibility.
 
For me, the most significant feature of this case is the noise that the incident is associated with. It gets described variously as like a helicopter and a vacuum cleaner. It was loud - and penetrating enough - to be heard by the adults in the same environs, one of whom was hard of hearing. Now most UFO reports famously claim that the objects are noiseless or enit a low hum of some kind - not the type of significant din that is implied here. This fact alone does incline me to believe that a mundane explanation is just around the corner somewhere.

To me,the best fit, so far (in terms of sound and shape) is the Cyde Hovercraft Ferry mentioned above. I doubt the girls had a memory of this, but could a similar device have been tested in the area at that time? Bit of a long shot....

But then there's the annoying and silly humanoid! It had short arms, it had long arms...Yeah, but no but, yeah... Then there's that perplexing description of it resembling a `telegraph pole`. Can anyone here envisage a human being in anyway resembling a telegraph pole? I can't. It's just such an odd image to use and it makes me wonder if we're missing something in terms of what the comparison was meant to be - although I can't think what.

It's sounds a bit boorish to say this but, children of that age are not always reliable witnesses: they make misperceptions of the kind that even someone just a bit older would be less inclined to make. They are also good at telling adults what they want to hear (and knowing what this is).

The two writers for The Flying Saucer Review - Randles and Donaldson both unintentionally skew their reportage in favour of a literal, and probably ETH based view of the event. Randles overstresses how remote the location was (yes, in the seventies Scotland was - geographically and culturally - more remote than it is now, but it was hardly North Alaska). Donaldson, considering the fact that the witnesses didn't report the event until a day later, jumps straight onto a `post-hypnotic command` theory before looking at much more obvious reasons. Note also how the illustration (in the postscript of the story) is that of a classic `flying saucer` whereas what the girls described (and this is tio their credit as to its veracity) was something cylindrical with rounded ends.

I'm open to a Paranormal Manifestation take on this case but, as with the Rainford Humanoid, let's exhaust the all earthly answers first.
 
I agree, the noise is key to the experience and the noise suggests some earthly piece of machinery.

The 'vacuum cleaner' type noises did suggest a hovercraft to me but there is one additional possibility I'd like to put forward, bearing in mind the other characteristics reported by the witnesses (including the cylindrical shape of the object, red light on top and the presence of a 'telegraph pole' type of object alongside it briefly).

IMG_3069-1.jpg


Perhaps a culvert, or some drain or septic tank associated with the pub, was being cleaned or emptied.

Of course pumping tankers don't fly, but it may be the case this bit was filled in afterwards by the imagination of the frightened witnesses.

Not coincidentally a similar sort of thing is my favoured explanation for Broad Haven.
 
Zeke Newbold said:
It's sounds a bit boorish to say this but, children of that age are not always reliable witnesses: they make misperceptions of the kind that even someone just a bit older would be less inclined to make. They are also good at telling adults what they want to hear (and knowing what this is).
Click to expand...
Children lack the knowledge of the world that's required to make comparisons. A small child seeing something for the first time will try to compare it to something that they do know, and the gaps in the similarities will be filled in either by the child or by the person to whom they are talking. Mind you, adults do the same, but their knowledge is usually wider.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top