I doubt we will ever know the truth

[puddlepirate]

LOL....I know, Wolf. A shock to many of us!!

[Observer]

We all have the right to think what we believe, i have done the rational thing to death, i have done the unthinkable to death and am no nearer.
If its some thing we don't need to know then what's the point of continuing.
Yes, i half believe that this event was not caused by man and i think that this is just as valid view as any other rational view. I have an open mind which must surely incorperate all possibilities.
I wish you luck in your search for the truth and if you do 'ever' find it was some secret weapon then i will be the first to congratulate you.

Here is a bit of help from me, a retired RAF Air Commodor who i'm pals with said simply, look at what weapons are in use to day and that may give you a clue to what happened then. That sounds like sensible advice.

Obs

[puddlepirate]

This link was provided by Adrian F (see video clips).

http://www.dailymotion.com/ovni1/video/ ... tie-4_tech

It is from a French TV series on UFO's. At about minute 06:26 into the clip - about halfway - two truck mounted missiles are shown. The truck appears to be parked at the end of the Woodbridge runway. However, this is not verified nor is the date of the footage known. Also, it is not known if the missiles are real. They are not in a launcher as such, just mounted on the back of a truck. They are painted white without, apparently, any other markings.

Can anyone throw any light on this? What type of missiles are they? Are they dummies or are they real? What was their purpose - air defence or first strike etc? Were such weapons deployed at the twin bases and in particular, were they deployed at Woodbridge - and if so, when?

[ghaynes]

Unfortunately the link is blocked by my firewall at work but the description sounds very much like the decoy missiles made of oil drums (amongst other things) that were located at both Bentwaters and Woodbridge. One of our guys at the museum , who worked for POL at Woodbridge, actually helped build them.
Regards.

Graham

This link was provided by Adrian F (see video clips).

http://www.dailymotion.com/ovni1/video/ ... tie-4_tech

It is from a French TV series on UFO's. At about minute 06:26 into the clip - about halfway - two truck mounted missiles are shown. The truck appears to be parked at the end of the Woodbridge runway. However, this is not verified nor is the date of the footage known. Also, it is not known if the missiles are real. They are not in a launcher as such, just mounted on the back of a truck. They are painted white without, apparently, any other markings.

Can anyone throw any light on this? What type of missiles are they? Are they dummies or are they real? What was their purpose - air defence or first strike etc? Were such weapons deployed at the twin bases and in particular, were they deployed at Woodbridge - and if so, when?

[Observer]

Graham
From what i remember reading some where, one of the Officers was not pleased with these old oil drums welded up to look like mock missiles and he wanted them removed.
Obs

[puddlepirate]

Thanks Graham. It they were deployed at both bases then there was obviously more than one truck with these devices loaded on the back but given they would not fool anyone analysing images from a spy satellite etc - which can read car numberplates and more - what was their purpose?

Dummies/decoys only have a purpose if they are like the real thing but these are nothing like the real thing and even the Soviets would not have been fooled into thinking they were some top secret weapon which they'd not heard of....so at the moment I fail to see the point.

However, although the objective is somewhat obscure, what it does establish is that there was a legacy of deploying decoy weapons at the twin bases and in particular, truck mounted missiles.

[Observer]

Just a tiny point re aircraft designation.
The Galaxy and Starlifter are two different aircraft.
Its the Lockheed C-5 Galaxy and the Lockheed C-141 Starlifter.

It erks me when people do this just as it erks others who call subs ships.

[puddlepirate]

Thanks for that. If I'm guilty of that then a lesson learned. My aircraft recognition and knowledge of aircraft types is rubbish, non-existent. Hence not immediately recognising oil drums masquerading as missiles....

I leave it to the Crabs to sort out flying stuff...

[Observer]

Puddle
I have little energy left to continue this enquiry for the reasons given earlier. but i suggest you save yours as well and concentrate on what you do know and believe in. Leave the blind ally's for blind people.
I know you have a pet theory so run with it.
Obs

[puddlepirate]

Hi Obs

I agree. There is nothing more to be gained from the discussions on here. That won't stop me ferreting about at the National Archive and other places though. I was heartened by MoD's response to my FoI request and will be pursuing their recommendation. Ditto the response from Suffolk County Council.

I have suggested a meet up in Woodbridge. A couple of forum members have shown an interest in that so it looks as though that might happen and hopefully LW will join us, plus I'd like to visit the Bentwaters museum so will be going there as well.

It has been an interesting exercise but it is definitely time to move on. Like I said, despite the fact that we would like to know, we have no need to know so we will only ever go round in circles.

Those of us who are still bound by the OSA(1911) and its US equivalent know full well the restrictions that exist and what can and cannot be revealed, which doesn't help but cannot be avoided.

[Observer]

Puddle
Good idea to meet up, unfortunately most of my weekends are tied up this year not to mention the extra expense i would incur, i have to watch the pennies now i am retired. I hope the meet takes place. You will love the museum and it does tend to throw a different perspective on things being there rather than sitting at a computer. I spent many hours on that base when it was active and my visit brought a tear to the eye to see it all now.
Obs

[Observer]

Silvertop
Its a good idea but not sure who you ask. I thought at one time that the Russians were involved in RFI.
Are there any other websites carrying out investigations into the RFI?
I do know that UFO'S are now of great interest amongst the Russian population and perhaps we could find one of their web sites.
Obs

[larry warren]

hidihi all
the problem the skectpics would really have to deal away with
is that many of ussuffered adverse health effects due to close
proximity to the objects, mine are well documented, and the
others have yet to publicly talk about there own.
i know for fact that others got hurt!
some day the USAF should keep an eye out for our classaction lawsuit! lets hope.
Larry

[Observer]

Larry
You old scouser. You and your buddies who were in that forest [ i suspect but can't prove it] were contaminated with Hydrazine vapour. It hangs in the air as a yellow mist, it can cause eye problems, respitory problems, heart problems in a few cases, hallucinations and some times longer term mental problems in a few cases. Its not a chem weapon its a rocket fuel. It has a funny smell similar to what you smell from the electric pickups on the 3rd rail of the London under ground tube train.
This information is partly available on the internet and what i have added was from a friend who was in the 'business'.
I think some of you may have guessed where i'm heading.
Obs

[AdrianF]

Larry,

Take it to the European court of human rights - you were on British soil.

Silvertop
This might be a good line of enquiry, one that's not been pursued as far as I'm aware?

It hangs in the air as a yellow mist, it can cause eye problems, respitory problems, heart problems in a few cases, hallucinations and some times longer term mental problems in a few cases. Its not a chem weapon its a rocket fuel.

Coming from... It's a good theory Observer and ticks a few more boxes than a lot of others have. I suppose this is a good place for it to be tested in theatre.

It has a funny smell similar to what you smell from the electric pickups on the 3rd rail of the London under ground tube train

I've never gotten that close to suicide, although I lost a hard drive this week, which caused me to have a few anger management issues.

Cheers
Adrian

[Observer]

Hi all
Don't beat me up if i'm wrong which i probably am but for what its worth, Larry describes in his book an object he saw that had lots of pipes and little boxes on it. Now look at the Chevaline PAC unit.
It was roughly the same size as the Apollo capsule, but more nose cone than mushroom shaped.
Longer but not as wide. I have no idea of its Gross weight but fairly heavy is my guess.

It so happens that these British made war heads were tested on the Ness for high 'G' factors which was done by a centrifuge. The PAC units were fitted with 2 war heads and were complete with the exception of the triggers which were tested seperately. The PAC unit was fitted with several different types of decoy systems, some were chaff dispensers and others emitted ionisation waves all to confuse Russian anti ICMB missiles. There was another decoy system on board that is still highly classified but i think it was a special 'balloon' dispenser but nothing like your rubber party balloon.
The re entry manoeuvering rocket motors were powered by hydrazine.

The higher than average radiation levels recorded by the disaster preparedness team in the forest was due to the fissile [plutonium] war head material. The 2 war heads fitted in the PAC unit were covered in a heat proof ceramic type material to with stand re entry heating.
Completed and tested war heads were then shipped out to the States for fitment to Polaris missiles which were then issued to the Royal Navy.
I will leave it there for the moment but i think this ticks many boxes.
Obs

[AdrianF]

http://www.skomer.u-net.com/projects/chevaline.htm

The Achilles heel of this one is that Thatchers Gov. went open with this systems development in 1979. It doesn't mean that they didn't have any mishaps or new developments along the way, which would have been good to keep quiet.

Adrian

[Observer]

Hi Adrian
Yes i knew that, but its worth bearing in mind that the Trident war heads which are similar were under development at that time as a replacement for Polaris. Chevaline carried 2 war heads, but Trident carried more which is still classified. Thatcher only disclosed the existance of Chevaline which remained a highly classified project.

When i have more time later today, i will list a few boxes that this theory ticks. Its probably a total red herring but at least its moving us on.

Obs

[Observer]

Hi Adrian
I guess every theory we have looked at has had a achillies heel, and aggreed this one is no different.
Any accident or mishap would be extremely embarrassing to the Government and also the US government if they had a hand in it as well. Whether Chevaline was public knowledge or not does not detract the seriousness of a misadventure with it and it was in no bodies interest especially politically for the disclosure of said incident to become public. At worst it could bring down a government.
Guys this is just a theory, but here are a few boxes as promised.

1: Larry's description of an object he saw, 'Lots of pipes and little boxes'. Chevaline PAC unit?
2: Onboard decoy systems, 'pyrotechnics, chaff dispensers, balloon ejectors and other classified systems'.
3: Hydrazine fuel cells, 'Is known to cause human health problems if inhaled and can cause hallucinations.
On very cold days it can hang around as a yellow mist, on warm days it disperses quickly.
It also has a funny smell some what similar to an electric arc smell from DC current,[tube train]
4: Was the patch on the grass in the field caused by Hydrazine spillage?
5: Penniston's description of a pyramid shaped object could have been one of the war heads which were
roughly that shape, there may be a discrepancy in the size/height but they are near.
6: They were tested on Orfordness, only 6 miles away.
7: The raised radiation readings at the alleged landing site, could have been from the war heads fissile
material [plutonium] There is always some leakage.
8: The war heads protective re entry envelope was a ceramic type material and would be smooth
and glass like to the touch.
9; Penniston's remark that it was warm to the touch could have been the temperature stabilisers used to
keep nuclear weapons at a constant temperature, which by the way is a few degrees above human
temperature, Hot row storage system is an example.
10: Were the indentations in the forest floor caused by a lifting tripod that was used to load object/s onto
a truck?
11: The PAC unit would be quite heavy with its 2 weapons installed, but quite light with out them.
12: Were the 50+ men in the forest just out there looking for any other bits and pieces from the PAC unit?
13: Was the ARRS involved in it's transportation because it was going to be flown out to the States and
it was best done during a quiet period just before Christmas?
14: Did the ARRS accidentally hit the landing lights with said object thus it was dropped for safety reasons?
15: Did the AWRE ask the USAF as a favour to transport the war head as they were on the spot and it
saved time and money? Was the C-5 Galaxy realy there to take said object back to the States?
16: Was the UFO story used because they knew it could never be answered?
17: Was the Apollo command module used as smoke screen?
18: Men in NBC siuts due to hazardous material at site.

19: How the F--K did it get there?
Give it some thought chaps and tear it up if its a non runner.
Obs

[AdrianF]

Quote from the link above.
"Note the small rocket motors in the nose for maneuvering the bus. The PAC was described as a mini spacecraft in its own right, capable of maneuvering in its own right and deploying decoys and chaff"

Quotes from Col Halt " Pieces of it are shooting off" "It was like molten metal, dripping off of it"

Was this being tested at Orford Ness at the same time as the RFI? If so then it does warrant a closer look.

Adrian