CIA using us

[Observer]

A good theory and totally feasable. We must rember that the B-58 was not a secret aircraft or a stealth aircraft but it may have been on a secret mission. Are you suggesting that the main part of the 58 is in the drink as we are pretty sure there was no land based crash?

A good one and i wait to see other's comments.

Observer

[SouthyR1]

Well with all what i have said, maybe the plane is in the sea?
Surely there would be records for this, but if this was covered up, i.e the Halt memo, then these documents are probably "lost", "unobtainible" etc.
I am not suggesting it is in the sea, but could it be a possibility?
Like i said before, everything, strange lights, flash light in forest, landing lights, two (possibly 3 with my suggestion) landing sites, which if i remember correctly on a documentary i saw, Penniston had a problem with Halts landing site saying there maybe more than one!! Strange men in suits, standing by a craft etc etc.
Still waiting to here other peoples comments??

Regards
Andy

[Observer]

Hi Andy

I think if this was the incident, the 58 was heading out to sea from a UK airfield, possibly Greenham Common and they because of a problem 'banged' out over W/Bridge, the plane continued on into the sea.

Basically Halt and co just stumbled on a rescue mission being conducted by the ARRS. It was the old need to know thing.
We must try to work out what all the lights were on the object/s and how did they just rise up and vanish or was that just the helo winching them up and the spot lights were the helos search lights?
It was not a secret or stealth plane so why not carry out the rescue in day light which would be much safer?
The mission may have been secret and it was not in the US interest that a B-58 had crashed or was it carrying a nuclear weapon???! which it was designed to carry.

Observer

[ghaynes]

Thats interesting

The B-58 was in and out of Greenham Common in those days, as i saw them for myself. Any pictures of the escape system.

Observer

The B-58 Hustler was retired from service in January 1970 (ten years before the Rendlesham incident!). Only one ever visited Greenham Common briefly and that was in October 1963.
Regards.

Graham

[ghaynes]

Not the best pic in the world but all i could find

http://www.aviation-history.com/convair/b58-8.jpg

It is an interesting piece of evidence, but is it relevant!!!?????
For me i think it could be?
Andy

Not really relevant Andy. As I stated in my last post it was retired from service in 1970. The B-58 was a very rare visitor to the UK - one brief visit to Greenham Common in October 1963 and an appearance at the Mildenhall airshow in May 1969.
Regards.

Graham

[ghaynes]

A good theory and totally feasable. We must rember that the B-58 was not a secret aircraft or a stealth aircraft but it may have been on a secret mission. Are you suggesting that the main part of the 58 is in the drink as we are pretty sure there was no land based crash?

A good one and i wait to see other's comments.

Observer

Just for the record, we (Bentwaters Aviation Society) have been involved with a project with English Heritage that involves investigating and documenting aircraft crash sites in the sea.
http://blogs.wessexarch.co.uk/aircraftc ... e-project/
We are confident that we know about every crash (both sea and land) involving a Bentwaters/Woodbridge aircraft.
Nothing crashed into the sea at the time of the UFO incident. If it had, the subsequent recovery operation would not have gone un-noticed by the local fishermen.
Regards.

Graham

[Observer]

Well Andy

Thats dead in the water, so we need to put our thinking caps on again.
It was a good senario but Graham high lighted some facts and figures that make it impossible. Plus we can now forget about any aircraft that might have crashed in the sea.

Observer

[Observer]

Hi all

Most of our recent theories have for want of a better description been pretty complicated and to a point quite far fetched. Imaginations have run a bit wild on some.

I now suggest this incident was much simpler than we realise.

Observer

[ghaynes]

Hi all

Most of our recent theories have for want of a better description been pretty complicated and to a point quite far fetched. Imaginations have run a bit wild on some.

I now suggest this incident was much simpler than we realise.

Observer

Hi Observer,
Totally agree, I think the truth is likely to be a lot simpler than we think.
Regards.

Graham

[Observer]

Hi Graham

It does in a way bring you back to the Apollo theory!
What we need now is some one to put their hands up and say "it was me and this is what happened" Some chance.

Observer

[ghaynes]

Hi Graham

It does in a way bring you back to the Apollo theory!
What we need now is some one to put their hands up and say "it was me and this is what happened" Some chance.

Observer

Yep, it would make life a bit easier!
Funnily enough, I was just chatting to a work colleague who drove past Capel Green on one of the nights of the alleged activities. He wasn't sure whether it was the 26th or 27th though (as it was a long time ago). Known this guy for 18 years and he has never mentioned it before!! T'was only because he saw me writing my previous post that he thought he ought to mention it! Anyway, it's not earth shattering what he told me, just that he saw a search light coming down from the sky and disappearing into the forest. He assumed it was a helicopter and didn't really think anything more of it as it was something he'd seen a number of times before.
Interesting...
Regards.

Graham

[Observer]

Hi Graham

Thats very interesting and in a way your friend is a 'new' witness.

What type of occurence would do what he described other than a helicopter. What's your educated guess?

Regards

Observer

[ghaynes]

Hi Graham

Thats very interesting and in a way your friend is a 'new' witness.

What type of occurence would do what he described other than a helicopter. What's your educated guess?

Regards

Observer

If he was incorrect at identifying the light source as originating from the sky, I guess that it could have been something emminating from the forest and pointing skyward. It would have to have been a very strong source to match that of an HH-53's searchlight though. Maybe a light-all? Will quiz him a bit more when he gets back into the office.
Regards.

Graham

[redsocks]

Hi All,

I agree that we could be chasing our tales here coming out with all sorts of theories.I've pretty much eliminated the involvment in my mind with Orford Ness,It was a strong candidate with its proximity and what was going on there but the dates simply dont tie in.Can we be agreed that there was no involvment from Orford Ness? I also keep coming to the apollo capsule theory,theres no doubt its pretty much what Penniston describes and the marks on the ground seem to be very close in size to the base of the capsule.Its funny but we all keep coming back to this,like has been said the incident is more than likely a more obvious theory.
Message for ppulatie I left a previous post for you have you seen it?

Redsocks

[ghaynes]

Hi All,

I agree that we could be chasing our tales here coming out with all sorts of theories.I've pretty much eliminated the involvment in my mind with Orford Ness,It was a strong candidate with its proximity and what was going on there but the dates simply dont tie in.Can we be agreed that there was no involvment from Orford Ness? I also keep coming to the apollo capsule theory,theres no doubt its pretty much what Penniston describes and the marks on the ground seem to be very close in size to the base of the capsule.Its funny but we all keep coming back to this,like has been said the incident is more than likely a more obvious theory.
Message for ppulatie I left a previous post for you have you seen it?

Redsocks

Certainly think we can safely disregard Orford Ness playing a part. The Cobra Mist project was cancelled in June 1973 and the radar equipment was dismantled and removed. That was the last US military use for the site as the British Government and the BBC took over after that.
A good site about Cobra Mist and Orford Ness is this one:
http://www.century20war.co.uk/page35.html
Regards.

Graham

[Observer]

We need to rewind a bit and take on board some of the statements by the witnesses.
We also need to consider Maggie Thatchers comment to Georgina Bruni,
"You must get your facts right" and "You Can't Tell the People".

Was this Maggie just being over cautious [as politicians are] or very serious?

The discrepancies amongst witness statements could just be down to poor memory, or they just saw events from different angles and points of view.
We need to check out just what type of kit was used to display all the various lights seen [and please don't mention light houses].

Lastly, why?

Observer

[redsocks]

[quote="Observer"]We need to rewind a bit and take on board some of the statements by the witnesses.
We also need to consider Maggie Thatchers comment to Georgina Bruni,
"You must get your facts right" and "You Can't Tell the People".

Was this Maggie just being over cautious [as politicians are] or very serious?

The discrepancies amongst witness statements could just be down to poor memory, or they just saw events from different angles and points of view.
We need to check out just what type of kit was used to display all the various lights seen [and please don't mention light houses].

Lastly, why?

Observer[/quote]

Hi Observer,

Couldnt it be more simple than that.The Apollo capsule/ARRS incident actually happening, surely the airmen are blowing it up into and all singing all dancing UFO alien story from that.There have been so many inconsistances with their storys it doesent make sense,I think we should be looking a bit more into the capsule theory and making sense of it there.I am finding it harder and harder to believe the airmen especially as we have covered surely all the possabilities.Good concrete proof of the capsule incident is all we need to dispell their crazy UFO story.

Redsocks

[puddlepirate]

Hi All

So let's get this right. The suggestion now is that in the late evening of the 26th December personnel of the 67th ARRS wheeled out the Apollo capsule from its storage, hooked it up to an HH53 and took off on an unauthorised flight, completely unnoticed by anyone, including the SP guards and the duty watch in Woodbridge and Bentwaters flight towers or anybody else, then to complete the hoax the ARRS dropped the capsule in the forest. This is the sighting that Pennston, Burroughs and Cabasang witnessed.

Then in the early morning of the 29th of December, obviously flushed with success at having completed the hoax first time around and having covertly retrieved the capsule and returned the aircraft without anybody noticing, they did exactly the same thing all over again. This is the sighting that Halt, England, Warren and others witnessed.


Wow. I'm impressed. Mystery solved. I am hugely impressed that they managed to succeed twice and despite the fact that, apparently, the Apollo capsule was known to many, that not one person amongst all the officers and men searching the forest - 80 on the first night (according to Penniston) and many on the second (according to Halt and Warren) - recognised it for what it was. A truly remarkable feat. All hail to the 67th ARRS!

[redsocks]

Puddlepirate,

The way I have seen it in all this is that the capsule was used in search and rescue,I'm sure it would have been dropped in the forest at some stage and I am sure it was spotted at some stage by some niave security guys.The rest was base folk law as Observer suggested .You havent got the benefit of talking to still serving airmen that were at Bentwaters around the time of the incident,none of them take this seriously its just laughed off as folk law.IF you come up with a better explaination I will listen but up until now this is the most likely theory and the other stuff the airmen are saying is BS to get some fame/money,but like I said I will listen to theorys as long as there not as outrageous as some of your theorys!!

Redsocks

[Observer]

Hey guys, come on.

It was me that introduced the Apollo capsule theory in the first place.
Yes, i mixed quite a lot with the servicemen [Mostly at the Gun club and around the married quarters] I have to admit that there was a lot of 'piss' taking going on about the incident, most was friendly banter.

If i run with the Apollo theory for a bit longer and please don't beat up about it, i suggested that it was not a caper in one of my articles but an accident. This occurred during the last couple of days of flying before they stood down for Christmas. The CH-53 with capsule slung underneath had taken off for a practice drop in the sea but clonked the landing lights with the capsule. They dropped it immediatly in the woods for safety reasons. The rest is Hoo Hah.

Observer