The landing site [later general discussion]

[Andy]

Hi Obs. It was a colleague called Dave Warren who witnessed the lights (amongst others), including his wife, Vie, who also witnessed them, and it was she who told me about other colleagues at the time going into the forest and reporting seeing 'scorch marks.' However, she admitted she didn't personally see them herself. In recent years a colleague i presently work with told me about his father, a Mr Flory, who worked on base, and ventured out into the woods in the days after having heard about it. He more clearly describe three round scorched areas in a triangular pattern, giving the impression something had purposefully landed as opposed to crashed. The area he mentions was at the time also fenced off and being guarded by military personell.
My own father also passed the forest in the immediate days after and also remember the forest edge being guarded by above said.

[Observer]

Thanks Andy

That is interesting, because we have Penniston talking about 3 indentations in a triangular pattern on the ground but no mention of scorch marks. Yet your witness says there were 3 scorch marks in a triangular pattern on the ground but no mention of indentations. Could these have been two separate sites i wonder?
Some body [ a retired USAF guy] did suggest to me that the scorch marks were made by ground lit flares which were used on the first night to attract the SP's attention. However, this is just conjecture.

Fencing something off on British sovereign territory would surely have included the local Police as the USAF had no jurisdiction to do that off base especially in a public place. The local Police were called out twice, on the first occasion they attended and made notes. On the second occasion they declined to attend saying it was a waste of time!

I would like to find whoever fenced this area off as there is no mention of this in any of Halts interviews.

Was it fencing or Police barrier 'tape'? Fencing suggests that a truck had to take it there and a gang had to erect it and all without the local authorities knowing?

If i was walking through those woods and came across a fenced off area guarded by USAF personnel, i would walk right through it because they would have no authority to stop me. If a British copper was there then i would not because he would have the authority, but that's me just being bloody minded.
I wonder if the guards were armed because if they were then that is one big mistake by the USAF and they would be liable to arrest by the British Police for breaking an agreement.

Obs

[redsocks]

Hi Andy,

Interested to hear your story about the area being cordoned off for days after the incident.We have an ex USAF guy on here who says there was activity on the said night in the wooded area by the side of the road but nothing the next day and days after.

Redsocks

[Andy]

You have made some excellent points there Obs and food for thought. If i have your permission, can i copy your posting so that i can give it to my colleague to pass on to his father (Mr Flory)? It will be interesting to see what is answers are? My father is visiting this evening, so i shall also question him further.

Whilst i'm here, just wanted to also say have a great Christmas, and best wishes for 2009

[Observer]

Andy

No problem, and please tell him that i don't doubt his word, i was just trying to put some logic into the situation from a different point of view.

Have a great Christmas and new year

Obs.

[Andy]

Spoke to my father this evening. He was going on a fishing trip at shingle street. He clearly described the route they took, and it most certainly passed East gate. He remembered who he was with, and was the father of a school friend of mine, Charlie Doe, and his brother Lance. It was Lance who pointed out the direction within the trees as they passed (and was being guarded, according to my father), where a 'UFO landed'........ all i'm asking is how did he know? News travel fast?.. he is British, not American, but nonetheless seemingly had heard about it? I haven't seen my school mate for years, but i work with his mother. I shall contact her and hopefully get in touch with her husband's brother, (ie Lance) so that i can question him.

My father is a second world war buff, so anything military fascinates him. He told me, 'They were definitely American servicemen guarding the forest.' However, when i asked about guns, and understandably it was a long time ago, he admitted that he couldn't remember if they carried them or not. On the face of it, not something you'd probably take much notice of when going on a fishing trip, and not particularly one who would take notice of a UFO story, however all these years on and what has been revealed, also believes something of significance happened, even if at that time and like many others, he didn't take that much notice.

[Observer]

Thanks Andy

There is always the possibility that something did happen that required their presence in the woods, but all protocols were broken if they were guarding some thing on British soil without the presence of British authorities.
The other possibility is that they had cordoned off an area, like a crime scene is cordoned off, no object there but they needed to sweep the area for clues/evidence.
I tell you what they weren't guarding, and that was an alien space craft.

Obs

[Wolf]

Andy

He clearly described the route they took, and it most certainly passed East gate

Where was your Father/his mates living at the time? Was your Father going via Woodbridge from Shingle Street? If so having checked on google it seems a round about way to have gone north and then east, when the shortest route home would have been via the Hollesley road which takes you to the south of Woodbridge airfield. This road forks off before the Melton road, off which is the southern end of what was track 10.

Can you just clarify this?

V/R

Wolf

[Andy]

I will do my best to clarify. bear with me.

[redsocks]

Hi Andy,

Slightly puzzled by the logistics of what you are saying,surely your father and he's friend would not have past anywhere near the alledged landing site because they would have stayed to the main road.There would have been no need to follow the track (that east gate leads off) that heads down the the forestry commision centre.If your father and he's friend saw something it must have been in the woods by the side of the main rd,which would be a completely different site to which has been suggested all along.

Redsocks

[Observer]

I wonder as redsocks said that this may be a different site that Andy's father saw and was this directly under the flight approach path?! Just a thought. Get the maps out chaps.

Obs

[redsocks]

I wonder as redsocks said that this may be a different site that Andy's father saw and was this directly under the flight approach path?! Just a thought. Get the maps out chaps.

Obs

I find this a great map site http://www.flashearth.com/ type in RAF Woodbridge look towards the east gate area and you can see that Andys dad route would not have taken him anywhere near the original site(s),the road that turns off the Woodbridge to Butly road(after east gate turning) would take you near capel green and yes as Observer states would be very close to the flight approach path.

Redsocks

[Observer]

Was this the road where BTDT said he saw the light alls all pointing away from the forest as if they were trying to stop people looking as they drove past? Yes, it doesn't sound like the area where we have been told the alleged landing sites were which i might add has been compounded by Halts admission that he had other sites invented. You only do that if you are trying to put people off finding the real site, stick a few red Herrings in.

I'll make a bold assumption here that the true landing site is right under or very close to being under the flight approach path. You can make your own minds up as to what that suggests.

Obs

[redsocks]

Was this the road where BTDT said he saw the light alls all pointing away from the forest as if they were trying to stop people looking as they drove past? Yes, it doesn't sound like the area where we have been told the alleged landing sites were which i might add has been compounded by Halts admission that he had other sites invented. You only do that if you are trying to put people off finding the real site, stick a few red Herrings in.

I'll make a bold assumption here that the true landing site is right under or very close to being under the flight approach path. You can make your own minds up as to what that suggests.

Obs

Obs I dont think this is the road BTDT drove past,he mentions coming out of east gate driving down the track turning left at the junction and it was all going on on the right hand side before the main rd junction.I assumed it was almost opposite Folly House the original site.We need to find out how far up the road it was before the junction of the the main rd,the Woodbridge to Butly main rd.Now if BTDT saw the commotion at the higher end of the road (near main rd junction) thats a different story all together and would tie in with what Andys Father and friend saw.

Redsocks

[puddlepirate]

From an earlier post by BTDT dated Fri Dec 12th:

Pupil 88, BTDT here, To be exact the staff car was parked on the right side of the road after exiting East Gate and turning left. The car was half way between East Gate and the intersection at the end of the road. I never said I saw a staff car go by but I did see one parked with all the other vehic...

From OS map Explorer 212 this puts the location of the staff car and other vehicles approximately opposite the northeast corner of Woody runway. At this point the map shows a logging road that runs up towards the northern side of the renowned farmer's field. Someone following this route would exit the forest at the edge of two small fields with the northern side of the farmer's field to the right. Continuing forward, across the two small fields is Water Wood. The logging road follows a bearing of approx 110 deg but is too far north for the lighthouse to be visible through the often referred to dip in the trees . Interestingly, the end of the logging road is almost directly under the flightpath for aircraft landing at Woody. The question is did this logging road exist in 1980? Perhaps the route numbers have changed whilst the actual routes themselves have remained constant.

Coincidentally, the direction of 110 and the two small fields broadly concur with Halt's description of the terrain covered by him and his squad during their pursuit of 'odd lights'.

Just a thought but could it be that our understanding of 'left at east gate' has been misunderstood? Could it mean 'turn left at the bottom of the east gate service road' i.e turn left after leaving Woody via east gate not 'turn left after passing the east gate service road when approaching Woody from the direction of the main (B1084) road'?

[Observer]

Reds

Point taken about the road and cordoned off area. The actual location of the cordoned off area needs to be established so one or two things can be eliminated.

There is always the possibility that there was more than one incident and at more than one location.
The other possibility is that there was just one incident but it had several locations I.E. items/evidence found at more than one location.

Some thing smells here concerning Halt and his men. For Lt Bruce Englund to go to Halts party and say "Its back Sir" meaning it was there the night before. That then says why was Halt ignorant of this. As deputy base commander i would have thought all incidents especially at the height of the cold war would have been brought to his attention immediately on night one or at least the day after by the security section boss. All incident reports would be on Halts desk in the morning. You don't have SP's going off base without a paper trail.

I don't buy this at all.

Obs

[Observer]

One can assume that Larry Warren meant for those exiting the airfield at East Gate, once through, turn left. There is no immediate left turn once you have exited East gate, Its [guess] Hundred yards or less before the turning comes up.

If on the other hand, you were approaching East gate from out side, the left turning is almost immediate at the gate, give or take a few yards.
It could be crucial to which one it is.
Ask Larry.

Obs

[puddlepirate]

In LAEG LW suggests that when coming from the B1084, one should continue past the end of the east gate service road then take the first logging road on the left. This means anyone leaving Woody from the east gate would go to the end of the service road, turn right then almost almost immediately left onto the logging road. From memory this is the signposted UFO trail route.

[Andy]

Sorry Redsocks, my father, like myself is not a liar. More to the point, were you there in the car??? No.

[Observer]

Andy
Do you think that your dad saw the cordoned off area almost opposite Foley House which puts it almost under the flight path. That could be significant, because i think we have been deliberately fed some very misleading information on the landing site/s by Halt.

All together now

GOD REST YE WEIRY RENDLEMEN
LET NOTHING YOU DISPLAY

FOR CH OUR SAVIOUR MAN
WAS HAD ON CHRISTMAS DAY

TO SAVE US ALL FROM MICRO POWER
WHEN WE'VE BEEN LED ASTRAY

OH TIDINGS OF COMFORT AND PLOY
OH TIDINGS OF COMFORT AND PLOY.

Merry Christmas

Obs