[Part 1] Rendlesham explained? [Visitor Submitted Article]

[Observer]

Hi puddlepirate

I like your ideas and possible senario that it was a Russian satelite. First of all, no body including the two books on this incident mentions parachutes which is what would have been used for a Russian re entry satelite.

The Apollo capsule based at RAF Woodbridge was a training aid only and contained no classified equipment or systems. The 67th ARRS were in sole charge of it and it was often spotted sat on the grass near some air side flight buildings at RAF Woodbridge. In effect it was a de classified training aid. Many servicemen including Officers not attached to the ARRS and especially those based at Bentwaters would probably be ignorant to its existance at Woodbridge. This probably includes Halt. It was a need to know thing.

If it was a Russian satelite especially a spy satelite that made an unscheduled landing in the forest, then it is very understandable if there was panic and then a cover up with perhaps a UFO story concocted to throw people off the scent.
Trouble is, there is little evidence if any to give this theory any validation, especially parachute evidence. If it crashed down to earth without a parachute, it would have made a lot more mess in the forest, probably a small crater with lots of debris.
The only evidence was the 3 foot marks on the floor of the forest which from what my sources tell me are very similar to the Apollo's 3 feet!!!

Observer

[puddlepirate]

Hi Observer

It was only a theory..... I wasn't thinking so much of it being a Russian satellite s such but something else of Russian origin that happend to go off track due to some technical malfunction or other. A manned capsule from a highly classified mission landing in the UK instead of the Ukraine or somewhere...it just so happened that a Russian satellite was re-entering at about the same time.

If the Apollo module frequently sat on the grass, then I can well understand a couple of ex 'nam vets, probably bored with a quiet life in Suffolk, thinking what an excellent scam it would be to hook the thing up and go flying.....Right up their street!

Also, I can see a scenario where all concerned were feeling dead chuffed at pulling such a stunt, until they clipped the landing lights (the ones at the end of the runway?) and then thinking....'Ooops!' before having to ditch the thing and executing a quick turn 180 to try to sneak back and pretend nothing had happened. Mind you trying to sneak back in a helo of that size (HH53?) would be chancing it a bit!

What I don't quite understand is the huge hue and cry that ensued. If it was a de-classified training module and therefore basically a stripped out shell, then it would be pretty easy to recover on the back of a truck (or a truck with a hoist) - albeit it might need a few bodies to lift it. Hardly anybody would have known it had been dropped in the forest and (I would have thought) it could have been quietly retrieved without too much fuss. In fact, the less external fuss the better. Of course, the base commander, flyco et al would have done a wall of death in fury and the flight crew would have felt the full wrath of their joint displeasure but all of that could have been kept in the family and the good people of Suffolk would have known nothing, or at least, not much. Also, the security team at Woodbridge who were on duty at east gate, which is close to the end of the runway, would surely have noticed the helo take off - especially on a quiet night and if it took off with a load whanging about underneath that clobbered the landing lights....

To be honest this is all total conjecture and I don't know enough about the flight path of the helo after take off or where it was normally parked etc..to make a sensible, much less informed, appraisal.

Generally speaking and I know our American cousins can act in what appears to us, a very excitable way at times, nobody wants to attract unnecessary attention to certain things and the fact that dozens of service people, helos, vehicles, floodlights and gawd knows what else went charging off into the woods on not one (or so I believe) but two nights, makes me think there was something more to this. Perhaps the second night was the prank (based on the events of the first night) but the first night was, well....who knows.

Then there is the issue re the possible evacuation of the prison. What was that all about? If a dummy capsule had been dropped then why alarm the UK authorities to the point they are planning a prison evacuation. Most odd.

Personally, in the base commander's shoes, I'd have made as little fuss as possible. Gone into the forest with as few men as possible and tried to recover the device as quietly as possible. Then called those responsible to the table and read them the riot act in no uncertain terms and invoked whatever reprimands/punishments fitted the offence. And from the pilot's perspective, if hardly anyone knew the thing was there, then hardly anyone would miss it. Plus if no-one heard me take off and if flyco didn't come up on voice to challenge me, then there'd be a good chance of getting back down undetected. In which case I'd park the aircraft in it's usual place and effoffski pronto, back to the mess.....hoping nobody would notice anything until the base returned to normal flying routine.

[Observer]

Hi puddlepirate

First of all welcome to this forum, its nice to hear fresh angles.

My theory was [i'm sure you read it] it was an ARRS stunt that didn't quite go to plan. However, it remains just a theory. I was in contact with a retired ARRS HH53 pilot who was based at RAF Woodbridge during that period and after several e mails he was not very forthcoming. He kept saying that he would rather not talk about it and we should all read between the lines and make our own minds up. Don't forget he is still on a hefty USAF pension! Those very words are quite loaded and perhaps we should now be looking out side the box as they say.

Have you read Georgina Bruni's book, You Can't Tell The People and Larry Warrens book, Left At East Gate? The latter is a bit fanciful in places but still a good read.

It was allegedly the local Police who attended one of the nights in question that alerted the local prison. We can only assume they thought what was in the forest was some sort of munition.

The bottom line is that this incident remains a mystery. Halt is on record saying that he knows more or others are sure he does, but again he is on a hefty pension which he is obviuosly protecting.

Observer

[puddlepirate]

Hmmm 'Hole can of worms' not 'whole can of worms'......could be a spoof. If the forum really was on the right track re the 67th ARRS then I'd expect a bit more than that and not necessarily on the forum. We'll all just have to keep a sharp lookout for MIB and comms intercepts.....

[puddlepirate]

Hi Observer

I've read Left at East Gate (Warren,Robbins); Beyond Top Secret (Wood, T); Sky Crash (Butler et al);You Cant' Tell the People (Bruni); Open Skies,Closed Minds (Pope); Phantoms of the Sky (Clarke,Roberts); Covert Agenda (Redfern); UFO Handbook (Hendry)......All very interesting. Apart from the UFO Handbook, Rendlesham is either the main topic or is referred to. However, they all seem to tell the same story - which is hardly unexpected. What seems to come across is the huge flap that kicked off - it just seems disproportionate somehow and if the ARRS did embark on a prank, then surely they didn't attempt it more than once, which leaves the question over what happend on the other nights.

Looking back over previous posts there have been some very valid comments made, especially those regarding the number of personnel involved in putting an aircraft into the air - flyco, ground crew, various authorisations, logbook entries and so forth, not to mention fuel or the fact that helos are noisy, very noisy - and the HH53 isn't exactly small.

I can't remember the exact saying or who said it but it was something along the lines of 'once you have subtracted everything proven to be impossible, then whatever is left, no matter how improbable, must be the truth'. It might be useful to go back to basics. List every element of the sighting and take away everything proven to be impossible - then see what is left.

I'd still like to know why the prison was put on alert. Our police aren't idiots and 1981 was not as PC or health and safety conscious as today. If they saw a need to alert the prison then there must have been a very good reason indeed. Unless I am very much mistaken, US forces would have had no legal jurisdiction outside the perimeters of the bases so to go off into the forest must have meant that legally, they were right out on a limb unless they had the full co-operation of UK authorities. Perhaps MoD plod, rather than the local force were involved? Also, I am pretty sure that if Col Halt claimed to have seen a downed UFO and had lead a party of men into the woods to find it, then he would have been led off to the funny farm faster than his feet could carry him. He wasn't. He was promoted. That alone has to tell us something. I am also inclined to think that the alert was the other way around, i.e. the US airmen didn't see anything. They were told something was coming and to raise the alert the minute they saw it or that something had happened and they were to get out there damn quick to sort it.

The fact that Halt sent the memo on headed paper in an informal format 'TO: RAF/CC' instead of as a signal message using the standard signal message format using opsigs, routeing indicators, prosigns, formatted text, etc, suggests the memo itself is a spoof - part of a diversion. The more I think about this and in particular, about the apparently unilateral actions taken by the US military on UK soil, the more I think it might have been a UK led SAR - but of such significance (NOT defence significance because it was already known what it was) that whoever acted as DISTAFF required specialist US assistance.

This leads me to consider:

a. Something the US did that they needed to alert the UK authorities about in order to gain authorisation to go into the forest. The incident being of such magnitude - both politically and militarily - that it was decided to allow the US to sort out the mess but under overall control of MoD.

b. Something we did at Orford Ness that impacted on US kit overflying Rendlesham, perhaps on finals into Bentwaters but having to divert to Woodbridge (Woodbridge being the emergency landing site, as it was designed for) because of a problem. Possibly something that affected navigational computers or whatever, causing a malfunction. Choosing a very quiet period, when both bases were on relaxed routine could be an ideal time to fly in something ultra secret.

I am beginning to think it wasn't the ARRS playing games but something that the authorities, both US and UK knew about in full detail. Something that was of such sensitivity, that it required a massive diversion to be put in place.

Having said all that, it brings me back to three possibilities: (1) A Russian manned capsule -maybe an ejection capsule - landing either off track or in an emergency (if an ejection capsule then the aircraft could have gone down in the sea), perhaps on a spying mission. (2) An almighty US cock-up involving something falling off one of their aircraft through malfunction or pilot error (3) An almighty UK cock-up that caused a malfunction in US kit

For me, the three key issues are:

a. The prison alert - it must have been a major incident (I wonder if any hospitals were put on similar alert)
b. The 'of no defence significance' statement - it's in the words, i.e. we knew what it was
c. Halt's promotion - he did an excellent job. He kept the whole thing out of the press. Nobody suspected anything and when it did come to light, it was a UFO. Brilliant.
d. The interrogation of and threats made to, the (at the time) very young and mostly inexperienced airmen. - only a very serious situation indeed would prompt that action. In the UK anyone who serves in the services signs the OSA(1911) and is bound by it for life. The US military must have something similar. The constraints imposed by the OSA and its US variant and the penalties for breaching them are usually sufficient without any additional threats having to be made.

There are only a couple of things that I can think of that would be so sensitive that if news ever got out there would be hell to pay, both politically and militarily and that is a downed Soviet or a dropped nuke (or if not a nuke then some other highly classifed weapon). In 1981 Regan was under Maggie's thumb. They were good pals so full UK/US co-operation would be a given in a major incident, even if that incident were on UK soil - especially if it were necessary to save their respective political butts (and one year later we went off to the Falklands...)

, ...er, and that's enough for now.

[ghaynes]

Hi everyone,

I received an "anonymous" email a couple of days ago:

Sir,
Best you drop the ARRS theory from your website, you could be opening a "Hole can of worms" for yourself.
Anon.

However, emails are never anonymous. I am just about to trace the sender's IP address and will report back to this thread if the results are interesting.

I wouldn't normally post emails I receive on the forum, but this particular email is "dodgy". I think we have a trouble-maker on our hands.

The sender left me an address to reply to, but it looks like a trap.

Interesting. Am curious to know where the email originated.
Incidentally, Charles Holt and Jim Penniston visited the Bentwaters Cold War Museum yesterday. They did some filming in our 'ops room' for a programme on the UFO incident that will be screened on the History Channel in a few weeks time.
Regards.

Graham

[Observer]

Hi all

Yet another documentory about Rendlesham involving Halt and Penniston, i hope they come up with new evidence this time.

Hi puddlepirate

You have raised many points in your last post and i am impressed with your handle on this incident. However, most of the points you have raised have been covered in past threads and articles.

I think it pretty well established by this forum that it was not an aircraft that crashed or as one idiot suggested on TV it was a new stealth aircraft that landed in the forest. Read Rendlesham forest, A Perspective.

One of the roles of the ARRS was to retrieve the F-111 crew escape capsule which they had a training model at W/Bridge. It was not classified. It was suggested that this is what landed in the forest complete with crew, but our investigations found that both Lakenheath and Upper Heyford were not flying their F-111's during that period.

The ARRS were one of a few squadrons in the USAF that could take to the air with or without control tower assistance [in an emergency] and they would radio to the next nearest manned tower [as Woodbridge was on stand down] which could be either RAF or USAF.
The only towers operational all the year round inc Christmas in that area was RAF Wattisham and Coltishall which were air defence stations. B/Waters/W/Bridge were not air defence.

As i said most of your points have been covered but i like your senario of ellimination which Admin has done to a point.

Observer

[puddlepirate]

Hi Observer

I have to admit that whilst I've read quite a few books on the subject, I've not read all the posts on this forum so it doesn't surprise me at all that I'm going over old ground.

There is a website at http://home.att.net/~jbaugher/1967.html which gives info on US military aircraft tail nos. There is an intriguing entry for a/cr tail no. 67-0032/0069 which states that:

"...0069 at the Southern Museum of Flight, Birmingham, AL. Noted in July 2002 in a fenced compound at Birmingham Apt, AL. The reports that 0069 was the plane that crashed on approach to RAF Woodbridge, Suffolk, UK Dec 26/27, 1980 seem to be in error. This is the famous 'Rendlesham Forest' UFO report, which may have been caused by an F-111E losing a tactical nuclear weapon."

This suggests that there was an aircraft and/or weapons accident and that reports were made about it (not necessarily official reports) but that it did not involve this particular aircraft. Therefore, assuming such an event occured, it must have been another aircraft. However, there is nothing on that website which gives any clues as to which one it might have been.

The F111 had an ejection module which encased both pilot and navigator and that one of these is on display at Duxford. Go here for more info on the module: http://www.f-111.net/ejection.htm

Puddlepirate

[Observer]

Hi puddlepirate

I think Graham Haynes of the Bentwaters cold war museum can enlighten us on any such crashes that occurred at either base during their operational life.
If an aircraft did crash over the Christmas period [probably on the airfield] it would not have remained secret for long. If it was an F-111 escape capsule, no body has ever mentioned parachutes which it would have. We have been told that the F-111 were not flying during that period.

A jettissoned nuclear weapon was a suggestion of mine last year in one of my suggested theories on this forum. This would tie up with the Prison evac.

I think every body is more or less convinced that there was no aircraft crash in the forest.
Yet some thing did land in the forest and it only caused minor damage to some trees with 3 foot prints in the earth. The only thing that comes to mind is the Apollo command module, but i'm open to other ideas.

Like many of us, i would love it to be a UFO even aliens visiting, but so far its not provable. Thus man made senarios have to be elliminated which we are also finding hard to prove.

Somebody out there knows what happened and i think its only a matter of time before they tell us.

Observer

[ghaynes]

Hi puddlepirate

I think Graham Haynes of the Bentwaters cold war museum can enlighten us on any such crashes that occurred at either base during their operational life.
If an aircraft did crash over the Christmas period [probably on the airfield] it would not have remained secret for long. If it was an F-111 escape capsule, no body has ever mentioned parachutes which it would have. We have been told that the F-111 were not flying during that period.

Observer

Definitely no F-111 crashed on approach to Woodbridge during that period (nor any other aircraft for that matter). You only have to look at the scene of an aircraft crash to see the devastation caused and then compare it to the 'alleged' UFO landing site at that time. There was very little damage to the surrounding area.
There have been a number of aircraft crash on approach to both bases over their lifetime. Most, if not all, of these are well documented...particularly in my book on the Twin- Bases!
Regards.

Graham

[ghaynes]

Hi Observer

There is a website at http://home.att.net/~jbaugher/1967.html which gives info on US military aircraft tail nos. There is an intriguing entry for a/cr tail no. 67-0032/0069 which states that:

"...0069 at the Southern Museum of Flight, Birmingham, AL. Noted in July 2002 in a fenced compound at Birmingham Apt, AL. The reports that 0069 was the plane that crashed on approach to RAF Woodbridge, Suffolk, UK Dec 26/27, 1980 seem to be in error. This is the famous 'Rendlesham Forest' UFO report, which may have been caused by an F-111E losing a tactical nuclear weapon."

Puddlepirate

Hi Puddlepirate,
67-0069 was an A-model F-111 (F-111A). None of these were based this side of the pond. The only exceptions to this are those A-models that were converted to EF-111A Raven electronic warfare aircraft, based at Upper Heyford. 67-0069 was not one of these airframes.
The only 'bomber' variants of the F-111 based in Europe were the F-111E at Upper Heyford and the F-111F at Lakenheath.
Regards.

Graham

[puddlepirate]

Hi Graham

Thanks for that. Do you know anything about the AN/AAS-35V Pave Penny fitted to an underwing pylon on the A10 Thunderbolt II from '77 on?

Puddlepirate

[ghaynes]

Hi Graham

Thanks for that. Do you know anything about the AN/AAS-35V Pave Penny fitted to an underwing pylon on the A10 Thunderbolt II from '77 on?

Puddlepirate

Hi Puddlepirate.
The 'Pave Penny' is mounted on the forward fuselage pylon (starboard side below the cockpit), not a wing pylon (you can see it on my avatar). It is basically a laser range-finder and marked target seeker and is used by the pilot to locate a target on the ground that has been illuminated by a laser source (usually by troops on the ground). This enables the pilot to employ laser-guided weapons.
Regards.

Graham

[puddlepirate]

Hi Graham

Ah. Thanks. I thought it was fitted under the starboard wing. I had a look at an A10 up at Duxford but as far as I could tell, none of the pylons were loaded. Did any of the A10's running out of Woodbridge have that kit fitted?

Peter

[ghaynes]

Hi Graham

Ah. Thanks. I thought it was fitted under the starboard wing. I had a look at an A10 up at Duxford but as far as I could tell, none of the pylons were loaded. Did any of the A10's running out of Woodbridge have that kit fitted?

Peter

Hi Peter,
Yep, you're right about the A-10 at Duxford. None of the pylons are loaded. Think you may be getting confused with the AN/ALQ-119 and AN/ALQ-131 ECM pods which were usually carried on the starboard outer wing pylon.
The A-10s at Woodbridge/Bentwaters did use the Pave Penny LRMTS. It was usually pretty rare for it not to be carried operationally.
Sorry for straying off topic guys.
Regards.

Graham

[puddlepirate]

Graham

Thanks again.....and apologies to the forum for introducing an off topic item. Will restrict future posts to the topic.

[Observer]

Hi Admin

I have just looked at Gary Heseltine's interview and am intrigued as to what Charles Halt is going to say.

Can you help us all by checking out when this new documentary is to be broadcast.

As you know from my past posts and threads, i have put forward several 'man made' senarios, but none more that me would be more pleased if it was a real extra terestrial UFO.

It is rather surprising if your 'dodgy' E Mail originated from a local council computer.
Perhaps the council or members of know more about this incident than we realise.

Regards

Observer

[Deep Purple]

If it was anything really big the press would have got hold of it probably by now, and we would have had " Sam Fox piloted xmas UFO at US base" over the headlines!
It will be interesting to see if they do come up with anythying unusual!
Of course another way of looking at the problem is that powers that be may have been watching us and think with the ARRS theory we are getting a bit close to the truth so they have told Halt to say something new and different. Seed the disinformation?
Georgini Bruni must have spent a lot of time with Halt and he apparently said of record she would never find out what really happended.
Problem is we are not just dealling with any ordinary matter where key witness testimony can be taken at face value.
email business is interesting, it could be someone is remotely using one of county councils computers . Why would some one go to this trouble and you need some tech knowledge.
Could be part of a security service disinformation campaign linked with Halt revelations.
The best disinformation always contains some truth.

[Observer]

Hi deep purple

All will be revealed one day and it will be money that buys the story.
Every body has their price.

Observer

[puddlepirate]

Don't get too excited over a firstname.surname@suffolk.gov.uk email addy....I work for a county council - not Suffolk I hasten to add - and have a .gov.uk office email address. Any local government employee who has email will have a similarly formatted email address (at work). All it probably means is that someone was using their office PC during lunchtime or after work or didn't have email at home or didn't want to use their personal email address. Having been in local govt for a long time now, I can assure you that the most important thing is dealing with the targets set by central government and how to deliver services with less budget - and I've never come across any MIB at County Hall.

So relax, Suffolk County Council are unlikely to be watching you.