The landing site [later general discussion]

[Andy]

It's hard to describe the different locations. The piece of video where they race down, suddenly turn left, then race back, is route 10 and in the vicinity of GB's site, over on the left. Following that is a narrow trail, this is where Halt's site is, then when the camera spans briefly over a field, then goes awry and look at some feet is area 4 (Larry Warren's site). It then goes onto route 12. The point where you see my dog Jet in the ferns, then suddendly jump onto the path is the area i speak of where strange phenomenon happens, ie dogs reacting strangely (not so on this occasion) and compasses/Mobile/Cell phones also reacting strangely.

I recognize the part of the forest you were in starting at the picnic bench (about halfway through the video). This is the general area from which AdrianF took his footage of the lighthouse flashing
http://www.chillfactorfilms.com/codenam ... house.html


Ian

Ian, you really are a star mate, and thankyou so much for the information. I put the video footage on here, on purpose, and sorry to appear sly, but i had a method to my apparent madness, and guessed that someone genuinely in the know, and having a good knowledge of the forest, the incident itself, and a good argument, would recognise certain points on the footage, and could guide me from there, based on the knowlege i have gained, and educate/confirm (for) me with their own (knowledge), which you have. As said, i 'Thankyou'

You then turn right (southwards) along a narrow path just inside the forest edge. Judging from the photo found by Georgina, the supposed landing site site shown to the local police and later investigated by Halt was a little further into the forest than this, but not much. You then reach the main access road which joins the field about where I think LW was. You then turn right (west) along this road and stop at a point where the surfacing becomes better and make some panoramic sweeps with the camera. This area, where the road divides, is what I have always taken to be LW's "staging post".

This is all i have ever asked, and based on the video which as said is (granted, but usefully, confusing, unless you know the forest well), you have totally confirmed the alleged site, (for me at least) and also LW's area of the staging post. As said, i don't speak ill of the dead, but GB gives a map in her book which is apparently nowhere near the site, and when i contacted her she was disappointingly and seemingly vague at best, and nonchalant at worst. However, as said, BB believes GB's site to be the one you clearly describe in your posting above, AND in line with the light-house, but as said, i really don't know where she got this information from??, but she obviously got it from somewhere?... yet she claims Halt's site is a few yards away down the track? But don't get me started on BB Unless thumb-screws and severe interrogation is legal that is?
Or having acquaintances/Friends who know her well, (or credible witnesses to things said, which i also heard), but i won't go there, unless necessary

As said, thanks for the information Ian, and also all the other you have supplied both publically and privately. I've always kept an open mind and on the face of it, and despite apparent ridicule, you are the only one who could give an explanation and back it up on a scientific basis, and give a good argument when challenged, because, and only because, you whole-heartedly believe in what you say and believe. I admire that.

[Andy]

I personally think YOU should write a book on the alleged incident, containing all the amassed information, data, facts you have gained over the years. I'd certainly find it informative, interesting, a damn good read, and probably nearest to the truth than we are ever going to get?

[IanR]

I personally think YOU should write a book on the alleged incident, containing all the amassed information, data, facts you have gained over the years. I'd certainly find it informative, interesting, a damn good read, and probably nearest to the truth than we are ever going to get?

My website is my book, and it has the advantage that it can be constantly updated.

Ian
http://www.ianridpath.com/ufo/rendlesham.htm

[redsocks]

Hi Ian,

I saw your interview on "britains closest incounters" last night and one thing puzzles me about your lighthouse theory.
The airmen always maintain that they saw red lights and anyone who has been to the spot in question at night and looked at the lighthouse will clearly see that it is a white light coming from the lighthouse??



Redsocks

[robert]

Redsocks

Not having been there yet I can't comment but our friend Nick Pope used the word 'Pin Prick' to discribe the intensity of the Lights from the Lighthouse when viewed from Rendlesham.

Robert

[Admin]

The airmen always maintain that they saw red lights and anyone who has been to the spot in question at night and looked at the lighthouse will clearly see that it is a white light coming from the lighthouse??

At the time the lighthouse's light was yellow in colour. If you listen to Halt's tape, you will hear that the light is described as both red and yellow.

Not having been there yet I can't comment but our friend Nick Pope used the word 'Pin Prick' to discribe the intensity of the Lights from the Lighthouse when viewed from Rendlesham.

I can confirm this. Yes, using a camera you can zoom in and make the light appear larger than it is, but through your eyes it is visible as a dot of light. When I finally saw the lighthouse's "beam" I was rather dissapointed!

UFO sceptic James McGaha once said, “If you’re out, a dark sky on a cold night in December, and a lighthouse is swinging through the trees, with this bright beam of light passing through the trees – it’s going to have some strange unusual effects – light is going to get scattered by the trees."

I know the lighthouse's beacon was brighter back in 1980, but still it's not going to "swing through the trees" or even create a "beam".
He clearly hasn't even visited Rendlesham forest.

[IanR]

Halt's description of the light as "red" is indeed a puzzle, as he is the only one to have described it as such. All other descriptions are of yellow or white lights.

In his online interview with Salley Rayl back in 1997, Halt described which he saw as "a very small object, but it was very bright". He only ever described seeing a small light, not a craft. John Burroughs' description has been similar.

I still haven't been able to get from Trinity House a figure for the current intensity of the light. Back in 1980 it was a mighty 5 million candelas, from a 3kW 100V filament lamp. The figure they currently quote, 635,000 candelas, I think refers to the last bulb that was used, a 1 kW 240V mercury vapour lamp. The bulb presently used is a 70-watt 12-volt metal halide lamp and is clearly much less bright than what I saw, and the BBC filmed, in 1983.

James McGaha was stationed for a while at Woodbridge and I met him on-base in September of 1986. He was at that time a Major with a pretty high security clearance, and assured me that the supposed tunnel between WB and BW didn't exist.

McGaha had been out to the site and checked with a geiger counter, but found nothing above background. He checked the public affairs file on the case and asked around the base and satisfied himself that there was nothing to the case. (He told me he thought the record on the security police blotter was removed because they were embarrassed.) I urged him to write up his findings but he never has. He comes across as bombastic, I know, but he has done on-the-spot research and spoken to people who were stationed there at the time or shortly thereafter and who knew those involved.

Ian

[robert]

Halt's description of the light as "red" is indeed a puzzle, as he is the only one to have described it as such. All other descriptions are of yellow or white lights.

In his online interview with Salley Rayl back in 1997, Halt described which he saw as "a very small object, but it was very bright". He only ever described seeing a small light, not a craft. John Burroughs' description has been similar.

I still haven't been able to get from Trinity House a figure for the current intensity of the light. Back in 1980 it was a mighty 5 million candelas, from a 3kW 100V filament lamp. The figure they currently quote, 635,000 candelas, I think refers to the last bulb that was used, a 1 kW 240V mercury vapour lamp. The bulb presently used is a 70-watt 12-volt metal halide lamp and is clearly much less bright than what I saw, and the BBC filmed, in 1983.

Ian

Ian R,
Congratulations on a well balanced program last night and the Specs are fine!

Have you a link or access to a link for the BBC program of 1983 or is there no longer any Archive film available?

Cheers

Robert

[IanR]

Have you a link or access to a link for the BBC program of 1983 or is there no longer any Archive film available?

I have put the video clip online on my site at
http://www.ianridpath.com/ufo/rendlesham1c.htm

It was Chuck de Caro of CNN who first played the Halt tape recording over film of the lighthouse flashing, which demonstrated that the words “there it is again” and “there it is” matched the flash rate exactly.

Yrs,
Ian (wearing his VDU specs at present).

[robert]

Many thanks, Kind Sir,

You are, as you came across last night, a true Gentleman.
I am sure Obs will buy you a Pint in recompense for the specs quip!

Myself, being from Yorkshire, I can't guarantee it!

all the Best

Robert

[Observer]

Robert
I offered last year but no response.
Obs

[Andy]

Ok, for me personally i feel i have probably established what i feel to be the area where 'something' occured?
BB, GB, VT have seemingly all at sometime or other, hinted that this site in one way or another (despite claiming other areas of the forest as being the alleged landing site) as being it? A few yards into the tree line, and directly in line with the light-house. In view of this, Ian R's theories cannot possibly be dismissed, either, bearing in mind it's location. I'm interested that JB has not commented on all this ?

I now have to fit into all of this, colleagues witness accounts ie five orange balls of light hovering over the forest, and there for some considerable time, (probably helicopters, having often seen the local police helicopter in the distance, and it appears orange), but then, what were the helicopters watching over?

Next, a colleague's father who worked on base venturing into the wood and seeing 'scorched areas', and a few days later fenced off. Also my father seeing Airforce personell guarding the edge of the forest. Of course all of this could be dis-information, but why would they want to do that? as all concerned were/are nothing to do with the military, apart from one just working on the base.

[Observer]

Andy
You have pointed out some interesting things and asked some questions.

I would like to know what was 'Scorched', as in the meaning 'burnt'. Was it on the forest floor or was it trees or what?
Only LW and one other mentioned helicopters flying over head on one of the nights in question.
Although Halt described the 5 coloured lights in the sky he never ever mentioned helicopters. The HH-53 is pretty noisy and they would not miss that.
My friend who still lives locally went into the forest about a week after the incident after being told about it from an ARRS mate of his and found on the edge of one of the logging tracks a USAF SP issued torch with a red filter fitted over the lense. He still has it.
Halt said on tape that there was a little/small red light shining at them or words to that effect. He later said it had an eye in the middle of the light, not exact words but will suffice. Was this simply an SP shining his red lense torch at them from a distance amongst the trees. That would look realy strange in a forest at night. He said its moving towards us, was this the SP walking towards them with his torch. Don't forget it was pretty dark.

The same ARRS crew chief who we were both friends with told us that if he told us what had happened we wouldn't believe him any way and he valued his stripes too much.

LW said the area was cordened off and at one point the local Brit Police were not allowed near. This has yet to be substantiated.
I think Halt and Co stumbled upon a clean up operation that he was not supposed to know about and the ARRS are involved some where in this event.
Obs

[IanR]

I now have to fit into all of this, colleagues witness accounts ie five orange balls of light hovering over the forest, and there for some considerable time, (probably helicopters, having often seen the local police helicopter in the distance, and it appears orange), but then, what were the helicopters watching over?

We have been over this before. There was nothing flying that night. The WB tower was closed, BW was open for emergencies only. And helicopters do not hover silently for hours, fading out as the dawn comes...

Ian

[Observer]

Just to add to Ian's last comments, several of the witnesses especially JB said nothing took off or landed from Woodbridge during that period of 3 nights/days, as for one thing he would have noticed and secondly as Ian pointed out, the WB control tower was closed down for the holidays. Graham Haynes can also verify this. Air movement logs would prove this. Forget helicopters on those 3 nights or even longer than that.
Obs

[puddlepirate]

As there was no flying from either of the twin bases, perhaps helo's could have flown from other nearby USAFE / RAF bases? One witness reported seeing lights performing what appeared to be a grid search - so it seems something was in the air looking for something on the ground.

[Observer]

Yes it was Halt [i think] who said it looked like a grid search. It is possible that a chopper was in the air.
If we are to believe the witnesses and GH that no flying took place from WB over that period, fine but it could have been an RAF ASR chopper. From what i remember [perhaps GH can help] only WB had helicopters, being the ARRS and none to my knowledge were deployed else where, they were all on a Christmas break. The RAF Air Sea Rescue on the other hand were 24/7/365.
The only person to comment that there were helicopters flying [notice the plural] was LW and one of his associates at the scene. No body else mentioned them. Either LW is right or he is wrong or we discount completely what he said.
Obs

[puddlepirate]

One other possibility might be civilian helicopters flying offshore - Bairstow used to operate fights out to the oil and gas rigs. It's difficult to precisely locate lights at night so unless they were directly overhead, they could have been offshore - and as Obs has said it could even have been a RAF SAR flight - a boat in trouble etc. If the aircraft was some distance off, that could explain why there was no sound - and let's not forget that part of the coast is notorious for sandbanks (that's why the Orfordness light is a sector light. The red sector is to warn vessels to stand off from the coast). This doesn't relate to the RFI directly of course but might be the reason for a grid search. They would also use searchlights......not over the forest or the WSA of course but over the target area.

Interestingly, the red sector is to the south, so if a vessel was in danger to the south, the search would be concentrated in that area but if someone had gone overboard and the tide was running northwards (between one and three hours after highwater at Sheerness there is a strong tidal stream running northwards, along the coast at Orfordness) they would have extended the search north of the ness. This is only conjecture but if anything like this did happen then it would explain why a search was taking place and why a helicopter was coming up from the south. The local paper would carry details of any rescue operation involving lifeboats (now I wonder.....a distress flare fired offshore? 'Molten metal' coming off it?)

It seems to me that there could well have been several things going on....something in the forest which by pure fluke, happened to coincide with something offshore.

[Andy]

I now have to fit into all of this, colleagues witness accounts ie five orange balls of light hovering over the forest, and there for some considerable time, (probably helicopters, having often seen the local police helicopter in the distance, and it appears orange), but then, what were the helicopters watching over?

We have been over this before. There was nothing flying that night. The WB tower was closed, BW was open for emergencies only. And helicopters do not hover silently for hours, fading out as the dawn comes...

Ian

So any ideas then Ian as to what it could have been? As said four or five orange lights hovering over the top of the forest for some considerable time, and moving about?

[Observer]

Andy
Ian will tell you its the light house, but as puddle said there could be a couple of incidents going on in the area one off shore that just coincided with some thing in the forest.
Its BRISTOW helicopters at Gt Yarmouth. They service the oil rigs. I mentioned this possibility some time back in a post where i suggested that one of Bristow's helicopters could be part of the equasion.
They were trained on ASR to a point with their Sikorsky SH-3's that was the passenger carrying version of the Sea King. They had a powerfull downward facing search light to light up the landing platform of the rig.
Having said that, a Bristow heli would not stay on station for long because the RAF ASR would take over.
The hover time on an ASR Sea King would be 15/20 min max, this would vary slightly depending on fuel/passenger load and distance travelled to and from.
Obs