Old scraps of info - do they mean anything more now?

[Observer]

I wonder what LW meant by dated in appearence. Was he thinking in terms of space ships depicted in 1950's sci fi movies or what?

The tiles are quite interesting as the shuttle also uses them as a heat shield, was this a heat shield on the object. If so it was subject to the earths atmosphere and gravitational pull.

Observer

[John Burroughs]

I will try to put the dates in order one more time. Day 1 Penniston and Burroughs. Day 2 Only lights were seen by the on duty fight. Day 3 Halt and I was out there plus this is the night Warren was talking about being out there.

[John Burroughs]

I didnot see a craft...

[puddlepirate]

Re Observer's comment re the shuttle.

Rendlesham was under the flight path (or very close to it) and the shuttle was a glider on its way down......

No, surely not....don't tell me it was the front end of a prototype shuttle that came down after breaking up in the upper atmosphere or on re-entry (hit by one of the incoming meteors or cosmos, perhaps), complete with burned to a crisp flight crew strapped in their seats.

Odd lights in sky, meteors, Cosmos....and amongst all of that, a bit of a shuttle (orbiter in those days). Lands vertically, nose up...just the forward part of the cockpit. Comes in on one remaining emergency parachute or parachutes attached to the ejector seats or something. Suspended front up under a parachute it might even look like an upside down mushroom. Ejector seats activate on hitting the forest floor.....

This is NOT another theory. Just an observation. I'm getting back to my Buccaneers....

[Observer]

Are NASA going to be up front about the loss of a shuttle, they had no option with the one all seen on camera, but this may be classified.

I think they grabbed a Russian Sat while in orbit and got shot down.

Observer

[puddlepirate]

Joking aside look at the very front...the black triangular front bit....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Chal ... Launch.jpg

[puddlepirate]

Not expecting this to be a theory...I'm getting a bit excited now. I think this might have been the shoulder patch that Warren saw. An F117 would not have had a patch (or most unlikely to have had one) as it was very secret indeed in 1980. However, this is a shuttle mission patch...is it like Warren's drawing, given that he saw the patch in poor light?

http://www.xscapesprops.com/star%20trek ... ch%20Z.jpg

[puddlepirate]

and this is an even better one....take a look at page 321 of Left at east Gate, last image on the right....then compare it with this:

http://cgi.ebay.com/COLUMBIA-SPACE-PROG ... otohosting

[puddlepirate]

Just to wrap it up...

An Orbiter on a training flight, perhaps practising landings prior to the first proper shuttle mission that launched in April 81 is almost over Great Yarmouth, flying east to west when it is hit by a piece of space debris, perhaps part of Cosmos. It breaks up and the front part of the nose, the black triangular part comes down in Rendlesham forest. Perhaps the crew managed to eject. They are recovered (after all this was the job of the 67th ARRS). On their flight suits they have a shoulder patch similar to the Columbia one (as Warren drew). JB happens to be off watch when stuff is recoved and transported to the C-5 under strict guard.

Halt and co are either part of the clear up or more likely, part of a cover story.

So, now, where are all the holes in that one. One at a time, please....

[Observer]

Hi silvertop

Just thinking sideways for a moment. If there was an early orbiter [shuttle] crash over that area and bits were found in the forest including boddies. Move on ten years, was the guy wearing a shuttle badge that LW saw there for the tenth aniversery of the distaster, maybe even LW and others were there for the same reason?

Observer

[ghaynes]

Just to wrap it up...

An Orbiter on a training flight, perhaps practising landings prior to the first proper shuttle mission that launched in April 81 is almost over Great Yarmouth, flying east to west when it is hit by a piece of space debris, perhaps part of Cosmos. It breaks up and the front part of the nose, the black triangular part comes down in Rendlesham forest. Perhaps the crew managed to eject. They are recovered (after all this was the job of the 67th ARRS). On their flight suits they have a shoulder patch similar to the Columbia one (as Warren drew). JB happens to be off watch when stuff is recoved and transported to the C-5 under strict guard.

Halt and co are either part of the clear up or more likely, part of a cover story.

So, now, where are all the holes in that one. One at a time, please....

I'm sure the sonic boom of the shuttle on re-entry wouldn't have gone un-noticed...particularly in the middle of the night?...
Regards.

Graham

[ghaynes]

Just to wrap it up...
So, now, where are all the holes in that one. One at a time, please....

Also.......where would the shuttle have launched from without being noticed? It's not capable of taking off like a conventional aircraft. Other than a 'normal' launch from the Kennedy space Centre, it could only get airborne on the back of a specially modified Boeing 747. This is how the prototype Shuttle (Enterprise) was flight tested. It would be difficult to hide a 747/Shuttle combo at an airfield so someone would have seen it one the ground. Not trying to discount your theory, just think something involving the shuttle couldn't really be carried out covertly.
Regards.

Graham

[ghaynes]

Just to wrap it up...

An Orbiter on a training flight, perhaps practising landings prior to the first proper shuttle mission that launched in April 81 is almost over Great Yarmouth, flying east to west when it is hit by a piece of space debris, perhaps part of Cosmos. It breaks up and the front part of the nose, the black triangular part comes down in Rendlesham forest. Perhaps the crew managed to eject. They are recovered (after all this was the job of the 67th ARRS). On their flight suits they have a shoulder patch similar to the Columbia one (as Warren drew). JB happens to be off watch when stuff is recoved and transported to the C-5 under strict guard.

Halt and co are either part of the clear up or more likely, part of a cover story.

So, now, where are all the holes in that one. One at a time, please....

If the purpose of the C-5 visit was to take some wreckage back to the US, why didn't it land at Woodbridge? It would be easier to covertly remove wreckage from Capel Green to a C-5 at Woodbridge (via the East Gate) than it would be to transport it to Bentwaters.
Regardless of what happened in rendlesham forest, it is odd that the C-5 landed at Bentwaters and not Woodbridge. Was it connected with the incident or just a coincidence? It wasn't unusual to see a C-5 at Bentwaters or Woodbridge.
Regards.

Graham

[redsocks]

I didnot see a craft...

John can I ask,you say you didnt see a craft yet you were with Penniston who claims to have seen a craft ? Pennistons claims "80 trained spotters" saw the craft leave the forest.Were you or not with Penniston at that time?.

Redsocks

[Observer]

Graham

It was only a guess that the C-5 was there to pick up some freight/debris from the forest. JB said that Woodbridge was closed down to flying and the tower was not manned on the date he mentioned, where as Bentwaters had a duty crew in the tower, this may explain why the C-5 landed at Bentwaters. This by the way though, JB said it was unusual for a C-5 to be parked in a security area with its own exclusion zone and was guarded, he said it was because of what was on board.

Observer

[John Burroughs]

On the craft part Jim called it a craft and as far as 80 people go not sure if he ment over 1 day or the whole period. allot of people would have seen ligthts which you could call a craft. As far as the C-5 goes Bentwaters had a secure area that Woodbridge didnot. I did not say it took anything out or what it was there for. It was not a normal arrival or the way they secured it. Also Halt staed he was not allowed access which would not be normal.

[puddlepirate]

Hi Graham

It would have taken off from where it normally took off from. The first proper shuttle flight was in April 81 so this (if it happened at all, don't forget) would not have been a regular shuttle mission, only a training flight. It would not have taken off from anywhere in the UK - nor would it have been a covert mission as such. Why would it?

Also, if you go here:

http://returntoflight.org/assets/pdf/ex ... _final.pdf

look at page 4 there is a reference to a shuttle being crippled by debris. As far as I know there were only two shuttle disasters. The first was Columbia which blew up following an 'O'ring failing after the vehicle was exposed to very low overnight temperature on the launch pad and the other burned up on re-entry after heat sheild tiles came off. There is also reference to a heat sheild repair kit being developed in 1979 but discontinued.

[puddlepirate]

For info:

This is the relevant piece of text from the pdf mentioned in my last post:



It was therefore prudent to develop a capability to repair any damage to the Orbiter before
entry; a similar effort was cancelled in 1980 when it became apparent that it was unlikely to
produce any meaningful results prior to the first flight of Columbia in 1981. Unfortunately,
repairing damage to the thermal protection system again proved to be technically challenging
almost to the point of impossibility. The thermal protection system was not designed to be
repaired on-orbit, and virtually every approach developed thus far has limitations. While work
will continue, it is likely that on-orbit repairs will provide only a limited capability for the
remaining flights of the Space Shuttle Program.
The last resort, if debris does again cripple an Orbiter, is to provide a safe haven capability
aboard the International Space Station where a Space Shuttle crew can await a rescue vehicle

The key word is cripple....

[Observer]

Hi puddlepirate

I can't find any web sites that give references to early pre shuttle test flights or their dates. They must be listed in the NASA development schedules some where.

The piggy back tests used with the 747 was for gliding landing training amongst other tests. As you said, they were all subsonic test flights.

The shuttle or early test orbiter is the only [air] craft we know that flew on a regular path/orbit over the east Anglian coast. All other flights by other types of aircraft F-117 or Aurora or you name it is guess work.
This craft is known and its flight path.

Yes, you get a sonic boom when the shuttle re enters the denser air on re entry, but thats from its whole shape. Its possible that it had a catastrophic failure and broke into bits before entering the lower atmosphere, thus smaller parts would not cause a sonic boom.

Observer



Observer

[puddlepirate]

Hi Observer

I cannot say with 100% absolute certainty that it was a shuttle accident but such an accident seems to fit with many elements of what we know, or believe we know. That's all I can say. I'm sure that many on this forum and especially those who were there, will provide irrefutable evidence to the contrary.

I'm workng from a position of weakness 28yrs after the event so it's the best I can come up with and if I'm shot down in flames, so be it.