For John Burroughs

[pupil88]

Halt’s Night 27/28
“They’re back”

Lt.Englund handed Halt a Starlight scope and said “look in the forest”.
Halt saw a glowing area and went in to investigate with a hand picked crew.
At the area where they saw the glow, they found three indentations on the ground in the forest , marks on the trees and broken branches.
Sgt. Nevelles took geiger counter readings of the area. He also took two rolls of film of the indentations, marks on the trees and subsequently, of the objects in the sky.
Lt.Englund said, “look over there”.
Halt and his team saw a glowing red object “like a red eye with a black
pupil, winking and dripping of molten metal”. The object moved in-between the trees. etc etc etc

Halt’s hand picked team consisted of Lt. Englund, Sgt. Bustinza, Maj. Zickler, Sgt. Nevells and M/Sgt. Ball.

Warren’s Night ?/?

Assigned Bentwater’s perimeter post 18.
Relieved of post by Lt. Englund.
Cleared by Central Security Control and post was deactivated.
Hopped into rear of security police pickup truck driven by Bustinza.
Went to motor pool to pick up light-alls
Gassed equipment and mounted to pickup
At main gate, ammo clips were removed.
A small convoy of 2 cars and 3 trucks were formed and moved out.
Convoy moved through the town of Eyke and countyside.
A road block was encountered near the lights of RAF Woodbridge
Convoy was directed to turn left at East Gate.
Travelled East Gate for half a mile and stopped at a clearing.
Nearly everyone got off the vehicles and awaited orders.
15 men and others in civilian clothes were seen heading on a narrow trail through the forest.
Major Zickler arrived in a car and stepped in a large, mud puddle.
etc etc etc

Lt. Englund, Bustinza, Maj Zickler were with Halt most of 27/28.
The two events did not take place on the same night.

Lt.Col Halt initially discounted Warren’s involvement and continued to
muddle dates, names, events and places as part of a coverup.
After retirement, Halt agreed there was a third night.

[Observer]

Hi Wolf

Is the 2164th CS site the one now derelict in a farmers field at the bottom of Bell Lane which is actually on the borders of Kesgrave and Martllesham Heath. Just off the Foxhall road.

Observer

[puddlepirate]

Hi Pupil88, forum all

The intriguing thing is who set up the road block and why. Also, who was already in the forest and why? Something major was already going on before the team from Bentwaters got to the forest.

I am pretty sure we are focusing on the wrong thing, the wrong events - we need to go deeper and wider.....any helo's or aircraft in the area need not have come from the twin bases, they need not even be USAF, they could have been Brit - either RAF or Fleet Air Arm, or even Army. It is possible that the event could have been of Brit origin but with US assistance to sort it out.....i.e. pretty much anything is possible!

I am not all sure concentrating on the various statements is helping any, too much contradiction and misinformation.

I had an odd reply dated 28 Jan 08 to my recent FoI request to Suffolk County Council regarding 'were any alerts in force during Dec 1980 that involved the emergency services, hospitals, prisons and other establishments?'...the answer I got was that they have a number of files relating to emergency planning procedures but - and I quote - 'these files do not appear to contain any specific references to emergencies relating to USAF plane crashes with dangerous weapons on board'. Which is odd because, unless I am very much mistaken, I did not ask them that.

[puddlepirate]

Forgot to mention....Warren said he was manning a post only activated during an alert. Source: p41. Left at East Gate; Robbins P, Warren L; Michael O'Mara Books, London (1997)

'..I was assigned to Bentwaters Perimeter Post 18. It is not a very important position in comparison to active aircraft areas or the weapons-storage area. I checked out my M16 rifle from the armory [sic] at 11:15 and was dropped off at my post. Manned only during alerts. It was at the end of the Bentwaters flight line at the very end of the runway. '

Two questions:

1. What was the reason for the alert?
2. Why was it necessary to man a guard post at the very end of the flightline, at the end of the runway?

[Observer]

Puddlepirate

Well, Suffolk County Council have either dropped a gooly or guessed what you were after and stuck in the bit about dangerous weapons Etc hoping you won't get back to them and will be satisfied with the answer.

Bit of a smoking gun there i think!

Observer

[Observer]

Puddlepirate

Its worth knowing why such guard posts'/airfield entrances such as 'East Gate' are there.
Most RAF airfields built before, during and after the war had several of these around the airfield. They were situated so they would connect with the off base road system. They were known in my time as 'crash gates'.
They were so emergency services etc could enter the airfield [depending on where the 'prang' was] from the nearest and most suited entrance.
Most RAF stations had unmanned crash gates although they would be manned depending on the alert status. This also applied to USAF crash gates which East Gate was one.

Observer

[puddlepirate]

Hi Observer

It was an intriguing response but it could be perfectly genuine. They might get many such requests and as you said, simply guessed what I was up to and replied accordingly.

I'd be very interested to know if the USAF had the authority to place road blocks on roads belonging to either the Forestry Commission, the MoD or on public highways. I suspect they did not and any such roadblock would be created and manned by Suffolk Constabulary or MoD police.

Working with my previous and somewhat lengthy theory regarding something coming down that the US did not want anybody, even their own people, to know about, then if there was British involvement that required US assistance, we are now moving towards JB's proposal that whatever it was originated at the 'ness. RCA controlled Cobra Mist and after its abrupt closure in Jun 73, they moved around 40 local people who had worked on Orfordness to Bentwaters (source: p120 Orfordness: Secret Site; Kinsey, G; Lavenham Press (1981). Was this benevolence or was there an ongoing project?

This all gets very messy but BAe Systems built the flight control systems for the F117 and the RAF had 3D radar at RAF Bawdsey so there was a direct link between British scientists/technicians, the RAF, new British radar technology, the USAF and stealth aircraft. The USAF/CIA(?) were keen to see what the radar at RAF Watton had - or most likely, had not - recorded. At Bawdsey it was standard procedure to photograph the radar images on 35mm film one frame at a time. Each frame was fast processed, dried then projected to the floor above, one minute later. Thus there was a time lag of one minute between the real time operator's display and the image projected in the room above their console. Does anyone know if this was standard radar procedure for all RAF radar stations and therefore, would have been in place at Watton?

Lots of conradictions, lack of reliable info etc but what might be emerging is:

1. a highly classified experiment/test involving an aircraft of the USAF and British radar(s)
2. somethiing on the 'ness contributing to part of that experiment
3. something going seriously wrong resulting in the aircraft coming down
4. a major USAF search/recovery operation activated in the forest

[ghaynes]

Hi Observer

At Bawdsey it was standard procedure to photograph the radar images on 35mm film one frame at a time. Each frame was fast processed, dried then projected to the floor above, one minute later. Thus there was a time lag of one minute between the real time operator's display and the image projected in the room above their console. Does anyone know if this was standard radar procedure for all RAF radar stations and therefore, would have been in place at Watton?

Am intrigued to know where you got your info about Bawdsey? The underground ops room at Bawdsey only had one floor. As I said in an earlier post I have never heard of radar images being recorded (they certainly weren't at any RAF bases I was stationed at) only audio transmissions.
Regards.

Graham

[ghaynes]

Hi Wolf

Is the 2164th CS site the one now derelict in a farmers field at the bottom of Bell Lane which is actually on the borders of Kesgrave and Martllesham Heath. Just off the Foxhall road.

Observer

Hi Observer,
Yep, that's the site.
Regards.

Graham

[puddlepirate]

Hi Graham

(Apologies if this post appears twice)

The PDU consisted of equipment that could record the radar image on 35 mm film, develop, fix and dry the image and then project it up on to the plotting table in the control room on the floor above. The displayed image was one minute behind real time. The PPI image from a high intensity CRT was projected on to the film through a focusing lens. Each revolution of the radar antenna took 15 seconds, so it took this time to expose the film to a full revolution. At the end of the sweep the frame would be moved on to be developed, whilst the next frame was exposed. When the frame moved on at the end of the next sweep the image was fixed, it then moved on again and it was dried. Finally the frame moved on once more where it was projected, via a mirror, to the floor above. Mean while the next frame to be exposed has been following on through the process, so at the end of the next revolution this frame was projected, 15 seconds after its predecessor. As frame after frame was displayed on the map the plotters in the pit could place markers on the map to indicate friendly or hostile returns. The senior officers could rapidly judge how a threat was building and see the big picture by watching the display on the map. The photograph shows the image at R.A.F. Sopley in southern England. The centre of the display usually consists of permanent echoes, or "clutter", and has been "blanked off" here (clear circular area, right of centre). Principle airways are represented by the long straight parallel lines. The squares with letters in them are used to make up the "Geo-Ref", used to convey the position of a target by voice over telephone lines. Individual aircraft appear as small black dots. The maximum range shown here is around 450 Km or around 260 miles. Occasionally there would be an incident such as an aircraft accident or an air miss and like the MARS described tapes above, we would be ordered to secure the relevant film until an enquiry could be held.

Source: http://www.radarpages.co.uk/mob/mrs/mrs.htm

[Observer]

Puddlepirate

I will start with your last bit first. Yes, i go along with that and most things seem to fit the argument.

As for road blocks, no they would have no authority. but having said that, if the incident was of such importance they would probably have gone ahead and sod the consequences. This would without doubt have been reported back to Suffolk Police HQ at Martlesham Heath. I think there is much more to learn from the Police, so who fancies doing it and leave me out because i was one although in a different force

According to Larry Warren, the local Bobbies as he called them were not allowed into or near the forest landing sites until later which is illegal.

One last thing, its not widely known but RAF pilots have been flying the F-117 for years on joint operations.

I think puddle pirate's senario is reasonable, it has some evidence and is possible. There are a couple of other theories where the evidence fits as well, but none of them are conclusive.

Observer

[IanR]

The PDU consisted of equipment that could record the radar image on 35 mm film, develop, fix and dry the image and then project it up on to the plotting table in the control room on the floor above. .. Occasionally there would be an incident such as an aircraft accident or an air miss and like the MARS described tapes above, we would be ordered to secure the relevant film until an enquiry could be held.

Evidence from an RAF witness confirms that this was indeed the case. Squadron Leader Derek Coumbe, who was on duty at RAF Watton on the night of Col Halt's sighting, was interviewed by BBC Radio 4 in October 2004 and explained what happened.

He says: "As usual, with any incident of any kind, any aircraft incident, any reports coming through, the automatic procedure was for the voice tapes initially to be impounded and also the radar film because the radar was on a permanent camera, to be impounded as well, and they would then be scrutinised later as and when required."

I have put a transcript of the interview on my website here
http://www.ianridpath.com/ufo/Coumbe%20interview.txt
and will leave it up for the next week or so.

The bottom line is that nothing was seen on radar that night.

Ian

[puddlepirate]

Hi Ian

Quite so..nothing was seen on radar and I believe that is key. If something HAD been seen on radar that would have been a bigger problem.

I do not have any evidence but I suspect they (USAF/CIA/NSA/other) took the tapes (with appropriate authority) because they were concerned that something had appeared on radar. Again, I have absolutely no evidence to support this but assuming the incident involved a stealth, then it was hugely important to verify its radar signature. They wanted to be sure it was invisible to radar.

An F117 was shot down over Bosnia. It was, apparently, a lucky strike followng dead reckoning calculations based on a sighting of the aircraft leaving a US base in Turkey or Italy. I am not sure I believe that but that is the story. I don't have the source to hand but I'll see if I can find it and if I do, I'll post it.

[puddlepirate]

Did a quick 'google' and found this...doesn't verify the dead reckoning claim but that is not particularly important.

http://www.aeronautics.ru/f117down.htm

[puddlepirate]

This is site contains an interesting discussion re the Nighthawk's RCS and an interview with the pilot of the downed aircraft.

http://www.airliners.net/discussions/mi ... main/25309

[puddlepirate]

This is site contains an interesting discussion re the Nighthawk's RCS and an interview with the pilot of the downed aircraft.

http://www.airliners.net/discussions/mi ... main/25309

and a bit more info on the F117's stealth capability - or lack of it!

http://www2.arnes.si/~lgrego7/f117-abstract.htm

[Observer]

Its interesting to note that the Russians are claiming and have done for some time that they can detect stealth aircraft and have the capability to shoot them down. This apparently has caused the US to re think their stealth strategies.
It seems now that they are only semi effective against Russian air defences but are far more effective against 3rd world countries such as Iraq who probably never had state of the art systems as was shown in the Gulf wars.
In 1980, sophisticated radar systems were in there infancy with Britain leading the way with 3D radar. The US was very keen to see how stealth stood up to this but more importantly they were just as concerned as to how the aircraft stood up to electronic warfare such as EMP and the F-117 went through a very intensive 'hardening' program with Britains help. The Bae systems on board computer as was mentioned in an earlier post was playing up on early models and this was probably one of the reasons that a development aircraft was in the UK and it was also probably based at at the Bae systems 'black' project works at Warton in Lancashire.
It was spotted on a test flight over the North Yorkshire Moors some years ago by an expert plane spotter who i have no reason to doubt.

Observer

[puddlepirate]

Hi Observer

Yes, the Russian claim is very interesting. The BBC Radio 4 interview (see Ian R's link in the post above) is also interesting - particularly the phonecalls received at Watton where it appears the caller was seeking an absolute assurance that nothing was seen when it was expected that something should have been seen.

More conjecture I'm afraid but if it was an F117 that had suffered damage from being hit by Soviet AA whilst on a sneaky-beaky (e.g. being tested in a real world environment), then given the aircraft was supposed to be invisible to radar (or at least with a very low RCS) then those investigating the incident would be concerned to know how the Russians managed to see it. They would want to verify what British radar had recorded. All being well it would be nothing. However, if British radar couldn't see it then how on earth did the Russians manage to track it - hence the insistence on being sure nothing showed up on the tapes/film at RAF Watton.

From what I have gleaned to date it seems the F117 was not absolutely invisible, just hard to detect and that its RCS varied with the angle of approach to the radar - and, apparently, whether or not the bomb bay doors were open. Further to that, it seems the aircraft was more easily seen by older radars, rather than the newer, more advanced kit.

If it were - and I stress IF it were - an F117 then it would have been one of the very first production models and given the two Have Blue prototypes crashed in the US, then it would make sense for the early models to be tested rigorously - and this would almost certainly include testing/performance analysis of the flight control systems at BAe in the UK. Also, the serial nos incorporated the last two digits of the fiscal year in which the aircraft was built. The first production models included in their serial nos 79 and 80, thus they were built in 1979 and 1980.

There was a very detailed post about the funding of stealth development and production a couple of weeks back. Well worth a read.

[puddlepirate]

It's occurred to me that these latest posts are probably in the wrong place....perhaps admin will move them or start a new thread.

Just a couple of questions re the road block at Woodbridge. Assuming there was indeed a road block. Then what was the purpose of it? Obviously to block the road to prevent traffic from proceeding southwards, beyond the east gate service road but why? The presence of a road block suggests an incident on, or very close to the road itself or to keep an access route clear for emergency vehicles. Today, travelling in that direction takes a visitor to the forestry centre and a dead end (was it ever a through route?). Therefore, whilst the claim is that the 'landing' sites were near to or in the farmer's field, could it be that the actual site of the incident was further along the road that passes Folly House and the end of Woodbridge runway, towards what is now the forestry centre?

If Halt, Warren and co were directed to turn left off that road then, when they left their vehicles, to turn right and take a route parallel to the road but deeper into the forest they might well have come upon a rescue/recovery party attending to an incident to the south, beyond the road block but in the forest. From OS map Explorer 212, this puts the incident slightly nearer Hollesley.....intriguing given the alleged alert at Hollesley prison.

[Observer]

Hi puddlepirate

It was one of my aircraft spotting friends [they always seem to be one step ahead of us mortals] who told me about the info on my last post. He also said it was not just radar that the Russians were using to detect stealth but it was in conjunction with their satelites, some thing 3rd world countries would not have. ECM, [electronic counter measures] again some thing we led the way in is in my opinion an ingredient in this incident.

Its been known for ages that these stealth aircraft are not totally invisible to radar, which is why i think that the stealth programm as we know it has been ditched. Hypersonic spy planes are another thing entirely as even if seen by radar will be almost impossible to shoot down.

Its a nice thought if it was a stealth aircraft that was the cause of the incident but there are so many loose ends that need tying up. Such as the object in the forest, the lights, the object in the field, winesses statements that must be considered at face value Etc.

Would film crews really be filming parts of a stealth aircraft, no way.
As one old mate said to me 2 years ago, you should be looking closer to home for your answers get rid of all the obvious reasons and what looks the least likely is your baby. Now theres some thing to chew on.

Observer