Lakenheath F15 Unknown

[AdrianF]

Hi
I just wondered if any one here has seen this before,
http://ufodata.co.uk/pdf/USAF_F15s_Encounter_a_UFO.pdf
an article on ufodata.co.uk, there is also a soundfile that was recorded by a radio ham.
Not sure if this has had discussion or not, but if there is anything to it, then this part of East Anglia is certainly notching up a few classic sightings.

I came across this on Nick Redfurns blog UFOMystic, there is a link on there to a Youtube video which uses the pilot coms audio file, cut to some aerial footage ( I don't think the footage is related to the sighting ).

Adrian

[IanR]

According to the PDF, there was an exchange as follows:

>>
One pilot was heard to say to another: "Did you see that?" And the other replied:
"Yes, but I don't want to talk about it."
<<

Am I the only one who thinks that sounds like a quote from Close Encounters?

BTW, what is "London Military Air Traffic Control" referred to at the start of the item?

This has the whiff of a hoax, or at least colourful reporting.

Ian

[Observer]

No offence intended, but any thing to do with Nick "there's weird creatures in Rendlesham Forest" Redfern is bound to be highly suspect.
Obs

[AdrianF]

Am I the only one who thinks that sounds like a quote from Close Encounters?

Ian,
The same thing did cross my mind, the quote from the film you might be referring to is something like this " do you want to report a UFO...over/ err.. negative we don't want to report".
I'm not sure if this dialogue is suspect as I presume this is how the conversation would probably go in this type of situation, but the lack of any other details about where this recording came from is.

Obs
Nick Redfern wasn't reporting on it, just really asking the same question, does anybody know anything about this?

IF.... this is genuine then I guess one possibility is it could be a sighting of a helium balloon??

Adrian

[Observer]

The old helium balloon syndrome.
This innocent little plastic bag filled with helium has caused more UFO reports than any other object known to man.

The favourite ones are usually coated in a chrome finish which does a great job reflecting the sun. I even saw a laser show where they reflected laser beams off the balloon at high altitude, it was weird.
Obs

[IanR]

I've listened through the audio file a few times now. Anyone have any opinions on its authenticity?

The first thing to note is that the audio does not include the quoted exchange "Did you see that?" "Yes, but I don't want to talk about it."

The main sighting seems to come from one pilot who says: "It didn't look like a bird it looked like – no kidding – a rock to me." (at least I think he says 'rock').

Later he says: "It's not falling" (since it was staying between 17,000 and 18,000 ft) and "Basically there's no airspeed on it".

Given that it was small and immobile would tend to support the possibility that it was a balloon of some kind, although oddly the pilots do not suggest that themselves.

Ian

[AdrianF]

Later he says: "It's not falling" (since it was staying between 17,000 and 18,000 ft) and "Basically there's no airspeed on it".

The other pilot seems to be a little confused on it's airspeed, he says that " it just flew right over me" and then seems unsure on it's airspeed. It does actually sound like a genuine exchange that went on, but with nothing at the moment to back this up, god knows where from.

An article from the Bury Free Press
http://www.buryfreepress.co.uk/mildenhall/UFO-mystery-at-RAF-Lakenheath.2145459.jp

Really not sure about this one.

Adrian

[ghaynes]

Hi Adrian,
This isn't the first case of a 'UFO' being sighted by a Lakenheath F-15. The CD of ATC/aircraft chatter we play in the Battle Cabin in the museum has another F-15 pilot to F-15 pilot exchange discussing a UFO sighting. When you come back to Bentwaters in the summer you can take a listen.
Regards.

Graham

Later he says: "It's not falling" (since it was staying between 17,000 and 18,000 ft) and "Basically there's no airspeed on it".

The other pilot seems to be a little confused on it's airspeed, he says that " it just flew right over me" and then seems unsure on it's airspeed. It does actually sound like a genuine exchange that went on, but with nothing at the moment to back this up, god knows where from.

An article from the Bury Free Press
http://www.buryfreepress.co.uk/mildenhall/UFO-mystery-at-RAF-Lakenheath.2145459.jp

Really not sure about this one.

Adrian

[AdrianF]

Thanks Graham,

I'll look forward to hearing it!

Adrian

[Observer]

Hi all
Do you think these F-15 UFO sightings from RAF Lakenheath are relevant to Rendlesham or do you think they are all part of a bigger picture that includes Rendlesham?
Obs

[AdrianF]

Do you think these F-15 UFO sightings from RAF Lakenheath are relevant to Rendlesham or do you think they are all part of a bigger picture that includes Rendlesham?

It could be? If this one turns out to be genuine, Graham has said he has a recording of another involving F15 pilots at the museum and we also have the 1956 Bentwaters/Lakenheath case. With the 1980 case, that makes 4 sightings over a 50 year period, from USAF personnel. All in relatively close proximity.

Cheers

Adrian

[puddlepirate]

I am with IanR on this one - what is London Military Air Traffic control? This title seems only to be used in various articles and is not, apparently, the name of any RAF Air Traffic Control station, which if LMATC existed, it surely would be (as RAF West Drayton used to be). A dodgy title suggests a dodgy recording....

[puddlepirate]

A couple of other comments:

Why would LMATC scramble the USAF? Surely, they would scramble RAF fighters, as the RAF is responsible for the defence of UK airspace, not the USAF.

The pilot(s) would also be reporting back to LMATC and their own control yet this does not seem to come across on the tape.

Also, the 'chat' just does not sound military - from air/air air/ground tx's I've listened to such chat is usually much more abrupt and business like....."c/s this is c/s....bogey one-five, in visual, appears to be an aircraft of some sort, now have radar lock on and giving chase, track zero three zero speed three niner fife knots, height forty two thousand feet, over" with the guys on the ground monitoring radars and voice ccts to follow progress, give instructions and receive feedback, that kind of stuff. These guys seem to be having a cosy chat between themselves...

[IanR]

I am with IanR on this one - what is London Military Air Traffic control? This title seems only to be used in various articles and is not, apparently, the name of any RAF Air Traffic Control station, which if LMATC existed, it surely would be (as RAF West Drayton used to be). A dodgy title suggests a dodgy recording....

Having looked into this a little more, I think that the errors on that PDF file are down to bad reporting by the UFO group concerned (what's new?). Seems that the voice recording itself was genuine and the object was most likely a balloon or part of one.
http://www.buryfreepress.co.uk/mildenha ... 2190262.jp [sluggish link]
and
http://tinyurl.com/58fh7k

Ian

[ghaynes]

I am with IanR on this one - what is London Military Air Traffic control? This title seems only to be used in various articles and is not, apparently, the name of any RAF Air Traffic Control station, which if LMATC existed, it surely would be (as RAF West Drayton used to be). A dodgy title suggests a dodgy recording....

London Mil was/is part of LATCC (London Area & Terminal Control Centre), RAF West Drayton. Anyone who listens to airband scanners will be familiar with London Mil and the many frequencies they use. Again, the CD we play in the museum has many references to London Mil.
Regards.

Graham

[Observer]

puddlepirate is quite right re air defence of the UK. It was an aggreement between the US/UK that US aircraft stationed in Btitain would only under take a 'strike' role and as such were not equpped for intercept role although having said that they were eqipped for for 'self' defence [dog fight if you like] in the pursuit of their strike role.

It was agreed that all incursions into British air space or even out side the 12 mile limit [which was mostly to do with shipping] was the sole responsibility of the RAF. Even objects/craft that looked threatening to a particular US base would be dealt with by the RAF.
This is not to say that US aircraft didn't go up to have a look but it would not have been an authorised 'scramble' to them from ATC.

Many US pilots were peeved they were not allowed any intercept action over the North Sea onto Russian aircraft and high ranking US pilots often wangled a pillion ride with the RAF on these missions. This was told to me by a USAF F-4 pilot based at Bentwaters.
Obs

[ghaynes]

Not strictly true Obs. When the 81st Fighter-Interceptor Wing first arrived in the UK with their F-86A Sabres, their role was to assist No.11 Group, RAF Strike Command in the air defence of the UK. This assistance was lost when the 81st took up its tactical nuclear strike role following conversion to the F-84F Thunderstreak.
Regards.

Graham

puddlepirate is quite right re air defence of the UK. It was an aggreement between the US/UK that US aircraft stationed in Btitain would only under take a 'strike' role and as such were not equpped for intercept role although having said that they were eqipped for for 'self' defence [dog fight if you like] in the pursuit of their strike role.

It was agreed that all incursions into British air space or even out side the 12 mile limit [which was mostly to do with shipping] was the sole responsibility of the RAF. Even objects/craft that looked threatening to a particular US base would be dealt with by the RAF.
This is not to say that US aircraft didn't go up to have a look but it would not have been an authorised 'scramble' to them from ATC.

Many US pilots were peeved they were not allowed any intercept action over the North Sea onto Russian aircraft and high ranking US pilots often wangled a pillion ride with the RAF on these missions. This was told to me by a USAF F-4 pilot based at Bentwaters.
Obs

[puddlepirate]

Graham/Ian

Many thanks.

The pdf makes more sense (ref IanR above)....London Air Traffic Control (Mil) is the proper title plus the a/c were not tasked to investigate, they happened to be in the air and decided to investigate something they saw during a sortie - hence the informal pilot to pilot(wingman?) chat.

I'm not familiar with RAF terminology but would I be right in thinking that given one part of RAF West Drayton ATCC was/is known as LATC(Mil) then the other is LATC(Civ)?

[ghaynes]

This may help a bit:
http://www.raf.mod.uk/raflatcc/
Regards.

Graham

Graham/Ian

Many thanks.

The pdf makes more sense (ref IanR above)....London Air Traffic Control (Mil) is the proper title plus the a/c were not tasked to investigate, they happened to be in the air and decided to investigate something they saw during a sortie - hence the informal pilot to pilot(wingman?) chat.

I'm not familiar with RAF terminology but would I be right in thinking that given one part of RAF West Drayton ATCC was/is known as LATC(Mil) then the other is LATC(Civ)?

[Observer]

Thanks Graham
I did know about their assist role in the early days but it evolved to the RAF only which was the period i was talking about.
Nice as these aviation topics are and who said what to who and what Air Traffic control did what is yet another distraction in my view to the main topic. You can argue and correct each other over designations and dialogue till the cows come home but it aint going to solve this mystery.
Obs