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

[Observer]

In my article Rendlesham explainded, part one and two, i attempted to offer the forum a fresh angle on the incident. It was an attempt to get some new debate going, which i'm pleased to see has.

The information i obtained was at best 2nd hand and in most cases 3rd hand so i cannot put any guarantee to the validity of my received information.

The scenario is feasible, but i have to be honest and say that even though i wrote the 2 articles i am only partly convinced they are the definitive answer. I do however think that some of my senario is quite compelling as against other ideas that quite honestly are not as compelling. I have yet to read another 'structured' explanation like mine.

If any body has one, then lets all share it.

For example, i do not disbelieve Jim Penniston or Lt Col Halt, but there are a couple of people i mistrust for the reasons i gave in the articles.

Observer

[ghaynes]

Here's a link to a pic on the DoD website that shows a 67th ARRS HH-53 Super Jolly Green Giant (not a CH-53 Sea Stallion as in the caption) recovering the Apollo capsule. Although not stated in the caption this exercise was taking place just off the coast of Bawdsey and was a very regular occurrance at one time. Not the best pic of the capsule but I will try and find some better ones.

http://tinyurl.com/2cwt6l

Full info for the pic is as follows:
Record Version: 00 02
Caption: A CH-53 Sea Stallion helicopter hovers after dropping pararescuemen into the water near a mockup of an Apollo spacecraft. The men are practicing recovery procedures for returning Apollo spacecraft.

Writer/Editor: M. Seaman
Special Instructions: RELEASED
By-line: SSGT Ken Hammond
Source: Film
Object Name: DF-SC-83-06700
Date Created: 19820304
City: RAF WOODBRIDGE
Country Name: ENG
Category: F
Supplemental Category: UNCLASS

The caption also states that the capsule was a mock-up. Unless there were actually TWO at Woodbridge, this is not the case. The capsule that resided at Woodbridge was a genuine Apollo one....s/n BP-1206 in fact!

Hope the link works ok.

Regards.

Graham

[Observer]

Hi Graham

Excellent stuff, and thanks for digging it up for the forum.
There are some good pictures of the Apollo capsule that admin dug up on one of his posts.

As you know my theory "The Crucial Reason" part one and two uses the capsule as the culprit of the incident. I have to admit that although i wrote the articles i only partly believe them. I have no way of ever proving that it was the capsule.

From your perspective of having lots to do with RAF Bentwaters and Woodbridge over the years, have you any thoughts as to what happened and why? Even some conjecture for the forum would possibly give us some fresh talking points!

Observer

[ghaynes]

Hi Graham

Excellent stuff, and thanks for digging it up for the forum.
There are some good pictures of the Apollo capsule that admin dug up on one of his posts.

As you know my theory "The Crucial Reason" part one and two uses the capsule as the culprit of the incident. I have to admit that although i wrote the articles i only partly believe them. I have no way of ever proving that it was the capsule.

From your perspective of having lots to do with RAF Bentwaters and Woodbridge over the years, have you any thoughts as to what happened and why? Even some conjecture for the forum would possibly give us some fresh talking points!

Observer

No probs Observer. I saw the earlier pics that Admin posted but the one I posted was of the 'actual' Woodbridge example. I will see if I can dig out some more from the museum tonight.
My theory is similar to your's....as I said in a earlier post. I would be very surprised if it wasn't a 67th ARRS practical joke involving the Apollo capsule. Likewise....it will be difficult to prove anything. The basis of my theory is formed around a colleague at the museum (who worked on Woodbridge base), saying that someone on the opposite shift to him saw the HH-53 with the capsule underneath, hit the landing lights. This happened on the first night of the alleged events. In an attempt to prevent any danger to his aircraft, due to an unstable undeslung load, the pilot jettisoned the capsule into the field at Capel Green. My colleague only has the word of his fellow worker as to what he saw and I must admit, that I find it odd that no-one else witnessed it....particularly as the damage to the landing lights is well documented.
Like you say, I guess I'm lucky to have had lots to do with Bentwaters and Woodbridge over the last seven or so years and have met a large number of ex-USAF personnel. I've heard some pretty interesting accounts of events that happened at the Twin-Bases.......not all of them UFO-related, it has to be said. One thing that I am 100% sure of is that there was not a secret underground facility (of any description) at Bentwaters nor was there a storage facility for UFO parts. This is pure fantasy and was probably only written to sell books and add meat to the bones of the UFO story.
Regards.

Graham

[ghaynes]

Just came across this link. Scroll down the page to 0069.

http://home.att.net/~jbaugher/1967.html

Not heard that theory before!!
Live tactical nuclear weapons would only be carried during wartime. For peacetime operations a training 'shape' would be carried that would exhibit the same aerodynamic and ballistic properties of the real thing.
The accidental dropping of a tactical nuke into a field at Capel Green would damage more than the landing lights on RAF Woodbridge!!

[Observer]

I find the whole scenario of an F-111 accidentally dropping a nuclear weapon or crashing into Rendlesham forest a bit fancyful. For one thing there were no flight operations at RAF Woodbridge over the Christmas period and why was an F-111 [based at either Lakenheath or Upper Heyford at that time landing on an airfield that had 'stood down' for Christmas?

We need to look at the flight operations over the Christmas period of 1980 from Lakenheath and Upper Heyford which i suspect had also stood down. Standing down did not mean they were not ready as all bases including RAF bases had a QRA in place.

Secondly, no 'live' weapons would be carried unless they were up into 'Red' alert status.
I know that the USAF have had a bit of history dropping N weapons by accident but not in this case. If it was a plane crash, it would have devistated a large area of the forest and would not escape the media.

The only bit of 'dodgy' evidence that could point to it being a jettisoned N weapon is the alleged evac order given to the local prison at Hollesle Bay.This as i tried to find out came to no answer from HM prisons service.

Observer

[Deep Purple]

One might get some good evidence for the apollo hoax therory for looking for civilian witnesses on the nights of the event witnessing helicopter activity. As it was xmas, night and a helicopter is loud, i would have thought some local residents near by would have asked the question why are they flying helicopters at night over xmas? I would be a bit fed up if during a lovely quiet xmas evening I could hear the din of flying.
As for any of the military witnesses not mentionng flying of helicopters they are military people and would have been told what to say and do.
You can image it " Airman, I dont give a goddam what you think you are going to say xxxxxxx and this is an order from General yyyyyy and unless you want to see the inside of a military prison till your 45 you better......"

[ghaynes]

I find the whole scenario of an F-111 accidentally dropping a nuclear weapon or crashing into Rendlesham forest a bit fancyful. For one thing there were no flight operations at RAF Woodbridge over the Christmas period and why was an F-111 [based at either Lakenheath or Upper Heyford at that time landing on an airfield that had 'stood down' for Christmas?

We need to look at the flight operations over the Christmas period of 1980 from Lakenheath and Upper Heyford which i suspect had also stood down. Standing down did not mean they were not ready as all bases including RAF bases had a QRA in place.

Secondly, no 'live' weapons would be carried unless they were up into 'Red' alert status.
I know that the USAF have had a bit of history dropping N weapons by accident but not in this case. If it was a plane crash, it would have devistated a large area of the forest and would not escape the media.

The only bit of 'dodgy' evidence that could point to it being a jettisoned N weapon is the alleged evac order given to the local prison at Hollesle Bay.This as i tried to find out came to no answer from HM prisons service.

Observer

The write-up in the link I posted quoted an F-111E as dropping the nuke. 'E' models were based at Upper Heyford whereas the Lakenheath-based jets were 'F' models.
IMO the 'nuke theory is way too unlikely to give it any credibility.
They must be a way of confirming if an evac order was given at Hollesley Bay though?
Regards.

Graham

[Observer]

Hi Deep Purple

From all my investigations i have never heard mentioned by any civilians helicopters. Admin may have more info on this. However, if you read Larry Warren's book Left at East Gate, he mentiones a helicopter flying over head while he was out in the forest with others attending the incident. He is as far as i know the only person to say this.

In my theory which you may have read, The Crucial Reason i suggest that the helicopter [HH-53 Jolly Green Giant] was flying on a retrieval mission which is what Larry Warren probably heard and saw. You will also notice in my article that i suggested that many of the airmen including officers were threatened if they did not keep quiet. Enlisted men with prison or worse and officers losing their pensions. The whole exercise was to keep this out of the public domain and more importantly from the British authorities.

Observer

[Observer]

Thanks Admi

I stand corrected, its a long time since i read the book.

It realy makes my argument stronger and i'm surprised that more was not made of this by our forum investigators. I am just as guilty of not following up about helicopters flying over the nights in question.

This subject must have some more mileage?

Best regards

Observer

[ghaynes]

Thanks Admi

I stand corrected, its a long time since i read the book.

It realy makes my argument stronger and i'm surprised that more was not made of this by our forum investigators. I am just as guilty of not following up about helicopters flying over the nights in question.

This subject must have some more mileage?

Best regards

Observer

I certainly think it's a theory that cannot be discounted. I was certainly not aware that other people had witnessed a helicopter on the night/s in question.
Regards.

Graham

[Observer]

Hi Graham

So now we have several USAF personel metioning that they either heard or observed a helicopter on the nights in question.
We now need to find out who if any local civilians [Brits] heard or saw it?

Observer

[Deep Purple]

I've been doing some more thinking!
From memory helicopters cannot be heard on Halt's tape, so if this was recorded at the time of the incident no helos where flying nearby. You might expect some helicopters to be heard but it does depend on when they were scrambled. The tape was recorded on the second night when "it" was retrievied according the theory/legend . A natural reaction of a station security given reports that that something crashed or was in the woods would have probably scramble a helicopter.
Certainly when I was at a military airshow and there was an unfortunate offsite crash the first recation was to send helos over the site to see what had happened
If the tape was a cover up for somehing it could have been recorded much later on- hence no helos.
But if it was all just a cover up and stage managing the whole event , why did they release the Halt memo years after? Until the Halt memo surfaced the event had all but died a UFO death.
It could be that they released the Memo and Tape as part of an opportunistic cover up when the F117a started to appear. You can imagine " You saw a triangular UFO, Ha Ha just like those other guys did "
The other aspect about the Apollo theory is why did not just simply say it was a night time practice mission and something had failed which had allowed the capsule to be dropped into the woods. This would be blending truth and lies in a very palatabled drink for the media.
Georgini Bruni's book mentions a general state of heightened tensions at the base shortly afterwards, and she by all accounts had interviewed or asked a lot of people. She mentions a large increase in high security messages being transmitted after the event, and I think on reflection it would be difficult for the security services to control this many people or anticipate the questions that may be asked many years later.
If it had been a cock up with the Apollo module why all the high security messages going back and forth?
The Apollo thing could be, as it has only just recently emerged another disinformation campaign, but it is so difficult to tell.
It would be interesting to look at some of the UK archives to establish when they first new about the event and whether or not there is any sort of document audit trail.
Sorry to confuse everyone!!!

[Wolf]

Hi All

I have been watching this thread with interest for quite a while and its good that people are thinking and doing some digging outside the box so to speak.

As it has been mentioned in earlier I thought you may appreciate this picture of the NASA capsule that used to be sited on RAF Woodbridge and was used for training purposes by the 67th ARRS.



Some time after the incident the capsule was moved to infront on the ARRS buildings. Here's a cropped and zoomed in section of picture DF-ST-90-10150 that is publically available from the DOD photo archive. (the crosshairs are mine......)



With regards to the incident itself I would always encourage people to look at what was the most probable, based on the available technology on the base first. Its not unheard of for accidents to happen and then be buried for years ie the B-47 that crashed into the WSA at RAF Lakenheath in 1956 causing a 'Broken Arrow' to be called.

I'm sure the truth is out there...... And this may well be the place it surfaces.

V/R

Wolf

[Observer]

Hi all

This helicopter thing needs more investigation as we know that several airmen said there was one flying on the second night. As Deep Purple said, it couls all be disinformation.

I new twist to my theory about the capsule being the culprit was put to me by another retired UASF airman very recently. He said that two airmen dressed up in space suits and got in the capsule. [Were there any space suits at Woodbridge for trainig purposes]? The prank was to try and make people believe that that an Apollo mission capsule had re entered over Woodbridge. Was it these two space suit cladded airmen that Larry Warren thought were aliens? Was Col Williams talking to them as Larry Warren said and if so it was probably in English.

Were all the onlookers hoodwinked by this caper?

Observer

[ghaynes]

Hi All

I have been watching this thread with interest for quite a while and its good that people are thinking and doing some digging outside the box so to speak.

As it has been mentioned in earlier I thought you may appreciate this picture of the NASA capsule that used to be sited on RAF Woodbridge and was used for training purposes by the 67th ARRS.

Some time after the incident the capsule was moved to infront on the ARRS buildings. Here's a cropped and zoomed in section of picture DF-ST-90-10150 that is publically available from the DOD photo archive. (the crosshairs are mine......)

With regards to the incident itself I would always encourage people to look at what was the most probable, based on the available technology on the base first. Its not unheard of for accidents to happen and then be buried for years ie the B-47 that crashed into the WSA at RAF Lakenheath in 1956 causing a 'Broken Arrow' to be called.

I'm sure the truth is out there...... And this may well be the place it surfaces.

V/R

Wolf

Hi Wolf,
Thanks for your input and welcome to the group. Those pics were taken when the capsule was no longer used for training purposes. It became a semi-permanent display at the entrance to the 67th ARRS ops building. I doubt whether the capsule would have had the plaque on it when it was used for training and the feet/stand were probably an 'add-on'. When in use, the capsule was usually positioned in open space in the middle of the airfield. After the 'UFO' incident it disappeared for a while and then re-appeared at the location in your photo.
Thanks again.
Regards.

Graham

[ghaynes]

Hi all

This helicopter thing needs more investigation as we know that several airmen said there was one flying on the second night. As Deep Purple said, it couls all be disinformation.

I new twist to my theory about the capsule being the culprit was put to me by another retired UASF airman very recently. He said that two airmen dressed up in space suits and got in the capsule. [Were there any space suits at Woodbridge for trainig purposes]? The prank was to try and make people believe that that an Apollo mission capsule had re entered over Woodbridge. Was it these two space suit cladded airmen that Larry Warren thought were aliens? Was Col Williams talking to them as Larry Warren said and if so it was probably in English.

Were all the onlookers hoodwinked by this caper?

Observer

Hi Observer,
I would suggest that the 'space suits' were possibly the silver one's worn by USAF fire crews.
Regards.

Graham

[Observer]

Hi Graham

Good point re the fire suits, i didn't think of that one, looking back when i was doing my bit in the RAF. The fire men wore a sort of aluminiumised suit with a full visor aluminium/silver looking helmet. They also had breathing equipment that was also heat proofed with some sort of ali covering.

You know i would love this event to be some thing more than what my theory suggests it was and i'm sure that goes for a good few of us. However, with the lack of a tangible alternative, the Apollo capsule along with the ARRS must be seen currently as the most likely cause. I would love to be proved wrong, but the irony of it all is i cannot prove my theory either. We need more help, maybe from people who have yet to come forward with new evidence.

Regards

Observer

[Deep Purple]

I've been away on business a couple of days and been doing some thinking again!
Sorry.
If the " Apollo " capsule had anyone in it and was dropped after hitting a landing light, you would have thought the people inside would have been injured. If the helicopter became unstable just after hiting the light why did it not just dump it there and then on the airfield. I dont fly but my understanding is that once you get a helo out of its envelope its very hard to keep any sort of control , particulary with 80s choppers which did not have fly by wire.
So if the helo dumped the capsule in the woods it would have had to climb above the trees
and let go!. Its difficult to estimate the drop but if you are clearing trees right into the forest , I would have thought a minimum of 20ft drop? and this would be probably enough to cause some injuries to anyone inside the capsule, But I am not a medic , any one out there that could comment further on this?
Its just if we are saying silver suited firemen got dumpted in the middle of the wood in a capsule I would have thought injuries were likely, which doesnt conicide with have a chat with the general after " Landing"
I go fishing a night on shore and in boats on the Solent ( Hampshire) and we frequently see the Coastguard helicopter operating at night ( I think its a Bristow) , and its always obvious what it is. Just the racket identifies its. The Coastguard Helo would probably be very similar in size to one used by the Air Sea rescue in Rendlesham and even from a long way off you would know what it was. Sometimes if an incident has happened you can see them searching with the night sun lamp. So I would be very suprised if the control tower could not figure out what they were seeing if it were a helo in the woods.
To me, but I might be wrong, it seems to boil down to a few things
1) It was the Apollo capsule dropped but hey got really lucky no one was hurt etc and a huge disinformation campaign was embarked on , when in reality all they had to do was say it was an "apollo" test excerise and it would have got forgotten about
2) It was the above but the spooks decided to use the incident to create a UFO flap to shield top secret aircarft
3) The truth is stranger than the above and we are being fed disinformation to hide it.

A good way of testing the the air sea rescue / apollo story might get every one who has had a bit a the story told to them together to see if we can identify ( without naming ) those involved . To do this you would normally want to get the people together and be interviewed at the same time to try and eliminate colussion.

If we are are being fed disinformation then its huge! Do a search under Apollo astronauts and UFOs and you will be surpsrised at what they say ,Neil Armstrong, Edgar Mitchell to name but a few. These guys would have been the best of the best, so they are either going along with disinformation or we are not alone.

[Observer]

Hi deep purple

My mate was Deep purples's bass player in the early days.

You are quite right in what you say re the fire men. It was only part of my theory. They could of course have arrived on foot fully kitted out thinking it to be a crash.
I think we can safely say it was not a crashed aircraft.
As for why and where the HH-53 dropped the capsule is pure conjecture but is quite feasable. Graham Haynes may be able to put my theory into a more logical sequence of events than i did.

Regards

Observer