25/26 December 1980 - Incident Begins [Page Discussion]

[DoRayEgon]

Hi Observer, i did send a previous message regarding the long scrapes/gouges on the trees but it doesn't appear to have shown. The marks i saw were high up on the trees (bearing in mind they were the original trees that would have been there in 1980 and much taller than the majority of the ones there now.) Forestry workers would have needed a crane type lift to get them to that height.

I thought all the trees in area in question were felled 2 months later? many remaining trees being destroyed in the hurricane?

Mind you there are so many different landing sites now i guess it's gonna be hard to tell what area was felled/destroyed at all

[Andy]

Hi DoRayEgon, good to hear from you. Yes, you are right, the trees in Halt's area were felled very soon after. Area 1 was felled only two or three years ago after the guy announced his findings/theories on TV

[Andy]

admin, Observer, please help me out here, i'm sure i'm missing something. As you both know, i'm no stranger to bewilderment Reading Skycrash page 41 Steve Roberts gives a map to the landing site. East gate Woodbridge. Turn left. 3/4 mile. On left hand side. To my understanding this suggests area 1? However, like i said i'm sure i've missed something and i confess, i haven't got the most logical of brains

[Andy]

Forgot to add Observer, i spoke to my ex colleague/friend Maureen tonight whose husband worked at Hollesy bay in the transport of prisoners department. Like i said, this woman is never stuck for words, could talk for England and nothing misses her attention (no offence intended, Maureen). However, when i mentioned it there was what seemed minutes of silence, but in reality was more probably seconds, however i was suspicious, because like i said, this individual is never stuck for words. When she did find her voice she denied her husband had been put on any sort of alert at the time but said that people higher up the hierarchy 'might have been in the know' but it did not filter down. I know this woman very well, and i am suspicious. She then, interestingly went on to describe the area of the alleged UFO landing and 'not being in the area that most people suspect'? 'Within the woods in the area at the end of the flightline'? (Area 1?) I have other prison service contacts i can speak to so hopefully one of them can divulge something that can give a lead.

[Guest]

Page 46 in 'Skycrash' is interesting too. The UFO would seem to have commenced from area 1 vicinity, crashed through the landing lights on the runway and then commenced through the forest for some considerable way before landing in the vicinity of the farmer's field. Take into consideration the previous messages of USO's in the area of Orfordness, and then REVERSE the map shown in Skycrash mentioned above, and then what course do the UFO take?; coming from the forest, crashing into the lights and landing into an area of forest nearby to area 1, if not area 1 itself

[Observer]

Hi Andy

I have compiled a letter to the Governer of Hollesley Bay, Ken Kan.

Requesting his search in their old files/records concerning an alleged EVAC standby for the Christmas period of 1980. I have also asked if it was the case, for what reason and who issued the directive.

I would like your thoughts on my letter before i send it, such as is it a waste of time or not? etc. They might just say mind your own business or say ask the home office, i just don't know how they are going to react.

Observer

[DoRayEgon]

Regarding the USO's if there by any chance a sewage outlet near Orfordness ?
I was at a beach party near Brighton a couple of months back (not 100% sure where as it was, it one of those turn up in a van with a genny and party till dawn partys).
Anyway it was near a sewage treatmnent plant and about 4AM a trawler trundles along the beach, stops just off shore and then a light comes on under water near the boat, sort of interested me (naturaly) so i was watching it when a local leaves the "dance floor" and comes over to explain it happens every night, apparently thats how they tell the concentration of Poo in the water, they shine a light through the outflow and measure how bright it is at a certain distance away (seeing how cloudy the water is i guess).
I know the east cost has these out lets i used to have a holiday home in Kessingland and you could see the outlet from my kitchen window (on top a cliff) and actually see the effluent spreading out at certain times of the day (like a large brown stain in the water) allways when the tide was on the way out.
Just a thought

[Guest]

Hi Observer, personally i think, nothing ventured, nothing gained. Besides, we have the freedom of information act now. I admire you, for having the courage to do it in the first place (which is the sort of thing i would do), and also for having such conviction, that most of us here seem to have, that something did go on, of more significance than we are led to believe, and want to delve further into the truth; also for beating me to it, because that was going to be one of my next ventures. Please let me know of any developments from this. If you need any assistance in any way let me know. In the meantime, when i get back to work from annual leave i will chase up the other prison service contacts.

DoRayEgon - thanks for that information. I really did find it interesting, and is something i want to look further into.

Admin- exactly. 'Perimeter fence'. Perhaps i wasn't missing something and the description Steve Roberts gave was leading to area 1? Strange also, (in Skycrash) he would never take Brenda Butler to the site he was speaking of. She seems to think it leads to Halt's area. Personally i can't see the connection, but i will be seeing Brenda next wednesday, so i will ask her more questions about it then? I also want to know how her key got broken in the lock of her car (outside Halt's house on base), but was able to drive away afterwards?

I would also like to say, in defence of Larry Warren, who seems to get a lot of 'flack' and criticism over his apparent 'changing story'. Georgina Bruni told me in her email that she considered Penniston to be a reliable witness. Granted. However, comparing his accounts: in Skycrash (under the pseudonym James Archer), the various documentaries ie 'Britain's Roswell' and 'UFO invasion at Rendlesham', and his accounts in Bruni's book, it appears that he too is hardly what i would consider to be consistent. He claimed that Hal't site was almost a half of mile from his. Interesting also that he apparently led the film crew for filming near to Foley house, which would be approximately half a mile away, and also within (excuse the expression) 'spitting distance' of area 1.

[Observer]

Hi all

I've posted it.

Observer

[Observer]

Hi All

I've just remembered that i am away for 5 days starting 6th Nov.
If i get a response while away, you will have to wait until i'm back.

Regards

Observer

PS If a get put way, i hope you will come and visit?

[Guest]

For some reason i keep showing up as 'guest' I have been having trouble with my connection and telephone lately though (probably tapped so if you see Guest, it is probably myself, Andy

Have a good break Observer

[DoRayEgon]

Your welcome
Possably not the best way to describe it but thats the exact words used when i asked, TBH i found it so funny (not the info but the way it was put) it stuck in me head
Been on the edge of ufology for years so wierd stuff does interest me and draws my attention
I must admit it's the first time i've ever seen anything like it (my main interest is L.I.T.S) but then i don't tend to hang around on beaches in the middle of the night that often, where as the local i was chatting to does (big party scene down brighton way) the party was actually at Shoreham, down the coast a bit near shoreham sewage treatment plant (great place for a party i know) but it was away from habitation (rather loud rave music).
And no i wasn't on anything! i was driving the equipment van (which is probably why i was less interested in dancing and staring bored out to sea) It's also the reason i know a bit about disco lighting, we've had partys in the strangest places, including a forest up a mountain in wales hense how i know how managed woodland is layed out (and i checked that rendlesham was the same at the time of the sightings) and the effects of strong lighting in different types of woodland (managed and unmanaged).
Managed woodland is much more uniform and easyer to arrange lighting in due to the avenues the straight lines of trees create, you need many more lights in an unmanaged forest to get the same amount illumination.
You can stand 2 - 300 yards into a managed forest and see out (during daylight) perfectly, in an unmanaged woodland you loose sight of the outside within 50 yards or so.
Exchange the "outside" for some form of illumination and you can see the huge difference between rendleshams visability today and how it was back in the 80's.
The one answer i never did get was which way the avenues where aligned back in the 80s?
By which i mean where they east-west ect? IF (big if) they ran from east to west this would have extended the effective veiwing range of the lighthouse towards the airfeild conciderably, lets not forget we are talking about veiwing the light source and not the illumination it creates.
For instance a 1.5 mil candle power lamp will illuminate an object at approx 3/4 - 1 mile away but can be seen from 5+ miles away, (never had to experiment with distances of over 5 miles as thats the max range of the tops (higher frequency speakers at max power) they never run that high but we like to make sure we dont pee the locals off

This may all seem extream for an outdoor party but 10 years on we've never had any equipment confistcated and shoreham was the first ever visit from the police (shortly after the trawler incident) and they just turned up to make shore we wernt smuggling in drugs from the continent

[Guest]

Regarding Jim Penniston, and also regarding the documentary 'UFO invasion at Rendlesham'. To my understanding, whatever site Halt might have shown the film crew, it had to be within a certain area ie near the farmer's field (Capel Green). Too much evidence suggest this is the area he claims, and he would be a fool (which he is not) to suggest anywhere away from this area as it would have been very quickly picked up upon, surely? Assuming this was the area he showed the film crew ie within the point 3 area of the UFO trail near the farmer's field, then standing there, consider the 'almost half a mile in that direction' that Penniston quite clearly states in the documentary. What i am saying is consider the half a mile in each of the directions whilst standing at Halt's site and facing the direction of Woodbridge air base. To my reckoning, behind you, to the left and to the right of you (half a mile) would not be a likely contender for the alleged intitial landing site, bearing in mind all the other evidence we have. It can only then be half a mile in front of you, surely?

[Guest]

That's what i like about this website, interesting, intelligent people who bring their own personal knowledge and expertise. Enjoyed reading your previous message DoRayEgon, you're obviously a man who 'knows his stuff' regarding what he does, and sharing it to add to the debate. I realise you were not saying the lighthouse was the cause, but using your knowledge to explain how it possibly could have been misinterpreted by applying your theories and knowledge of lighting effects. Looking at Adrian Bustinza's photo of the forest as seen from east gate (Bruni 2001) unless i'm mistaken, the trees would appear to have been planted east-west which adds interest to your theory. However, please don't think i'm being dismissive because that is not the case, and only adding to the debate, but have you been into Rendlesham at night and viewed the lighthouse from the farmer's field? If you haven't, believe me, it is pathetic. Also, apparently, Ian Ridpath's contribution was allegedly 'doctored.' I also would question why the men involved who had probably stood guarding east gate many times before, would suddenly notice the lighthouse beam on this occasion? Your other USO theory has really got me intrigued though. Thanks for that info, i intend to investigate this further next week.

[Guest]

So, Cosmos 749 re-entered the atmosphere on 25/26th December 1980. Well, that's it then! Been good knowing you guys, but that's my investigations finished and, explains then what my colleagues saw from the upper storey windows of St Audry's hospital with a clear view over the trees towards Rendlesham and Woodbridge base. Five brightly glowing orange balls of lights, giving off other lights (mainly blue) and hovering over Rendlesham forest for some considerable time, enough for them to become bored of watching, believing it to be 'probably the Americans up to something at the base.' All this time it was five bits of Cosmos 749 hovering over the forest. Excuse us whilst we hide our faces with embarrassment and shame for being so stupid and gullible!

[DoRayEgon]

That's what i like about this website, interesting, intelligent people who bring their own personal knowledge and expertise. Enjoyed reading your previous message DoRayEgon, you're obviously a man who 'knows his stuff' regarding what he does, and sharing it to add to the debate. I realise you were not saying the lighthouse was the cause, but using your knowledge to explain how it possibly could have been misinterpreted by applying your theories and knowledge of lighting effects. Looking at Adrian Bustinza's photo of the forest as seen from east gate (Bruni 2001) unless i'm mistaken, the trees would appear to have been planted east-west which adds interest to your theory. However, please don't think i'm being dismissive because that is not the case, and only adding to the debate, but have you been into Rendlesham at night and viewed the lighthouse from the farmer's field? If you haven't, believe me, it is pathetic. Also, apparently, Ian Ridpath's contribution was allegedly 'doctored.' I also would question why the men involved who had probably stood guarding east gate many times before, would suddenly notice the lighthouse beam on this occasion? Your other USO theory has really got me intrigued though. Thanks for that info, i intend to investigate this further next week.

My personal beleif (which is immeteirial TBH as it's a beleif and not a proven) is that it was a combination of events rather than a singular event that made up the rendlesham incident, now what that/those event/s were is the big question.

As it stands today, i don't think the lighthouse argument holds much water as to how different it was back in 1980 i can only suggest.
Unless you beleive that the east gate sighting was of the cosmos re entry, followed by chasing the lighthouse for an hour, which then in turn affected witneses interpretaions of the second nights activity leading to the Halt tape?
My main input being did Halt use the star scope to veiw the light (because i have, well i have used it on the lighthouse as to wether Halt was looking at the lighthouse? thats why i'm here), if he did it would have looked very different to what it actualy was and IF that was the case could that have made a difference to the rest of the nights activity.
Lots of "ifs" and "coulds" but i feel they need to be asked as in my mind they are a possability.

Having visited Rendlesham on an "official" BB tour and on my own i noticed how 2 people standing side by side veiwing the same thing could come to 2 different conclusions, more importantly i noticed why, I also noticed how the more "panicy" in the group got worse at the wilder theorys to the nights event whilst ignoring the truth/milder theorys to the point of loosing it and having to leave the forest mid tour.
The full expanation could take it's own thread)

To be honist it's the interpretation of the evidence that intreges me more, i'd rather put different veiws to the case and let others far more qualified to disemble the arguments for and against

I in no way regard my self as an expert in any feild, more an interested party in many, i just add what i know in the hope that it may be of help to those with perhaps less knolledge in a feild in which have some, no-one can be an expert at everything
I use my mechanical knolledge to add to car stop cases when and where it seems needed or to fill a detailed spot in a theory or argument where i am in the position of holding more knolledge than the theorist.
As you may have noticed i "get about a bit"

IMHO a balenced descusion is more likely to come nearer the truth than a one sided one, i don't want to solve anything thats too much hard work my intention is to offer a wider selection of options to choose from.
I can be anoying so you'll just have to put up with that
If i come accross as saying this it what it was, thats not my intention, more a lack of skill in wording posts (this one took me an hour )

Theres has only been one sighting i KNOW 100% was not as it was reported to be and that was the one i veiwed myself, even the MTV awards light desplay that caused me to reseave a couple of phone calls telling me of an alien light ship hovering over N London could only ever be a 99% correct answer cos there still remains the X factor (the fact that we are infact being visited by Aliens and they where using the light display as a cover).

[Guest]

Just watched 'UFO invasion at Rendlesham' again (yes, i did manage to remain awake). Please.... granted, if you live in the States (or anywhere else for that matter) and don't know Rendlesham that well, you could be fed allsorts, because you would be none the wiser and probably be enthralled by what you saw; however, for those of us who actually live very near Rendlesham, and know it's lay-out very well, let's just say this. I recognised the areas/sites that Penniston/Halt showed on camera and all the 'blurb' that went with it, but i still remain confused, knowing the forest like i/we do and trying to piece it (ie the locations) with what they were claiming. Any documentary team out there want to film more accurate locations to tie in with the alleged facts? Please go ahead and give us something more interesting.

[Guest]

Adrian Bustinza's interview with G.Bruni in her book always interests me. On Halt's tape and the transcript that G.Bruni done, he can apprently be heard on site with Halt, examining the intial landing site; of which G.Bruni also shows a photo of, taken by Ray Guylas the morning after, which shows stakes in the ground marking the indentations that Halt appears to be making reference to on his tape. So i would guess, this WAS the initial landing site. Halt then sends Bustinza to get more lightalls from Woodbridge base (previously it would seem that they had gone all the way to Bentwaters for lightalls, so why they didn't go to Woodbridge base in the first instance, i don't know? but that's by the by). However, on his return he mentioned trying to catch up with Halt's patrol and seeing the lights moving through the trees. To me this would suggest that Halt was then away from the initial landing site and chasing the craft. When he (Bustinza) arrived the craft had already landed in a clearing near the farmer's field which would appear to be the site pointed out to Brenda Butler by Halt in the early days of researching Skycrash which is now known as area 3 on the UFO trail (and also confirmed to Bruni by Bustinza). Like i said previously on UFO invasion at Rendlesham, Penniston states that Halts site he had showed the crew was almost a half a mile from his. I can't believe that Halt would have showed the crew any other site than near the farmer's field as surely the researchers for the documentary, if they were any good, would have quickly picked up on this? Please also, anyone who does have Skycrash look at the map given by Steve Roberts and if you can explain to me how that possibly could relate to Halt's site i would be grateful, because i personally cannot see the connection. Like i said i will ask Brenda about it on wednesday, as i'm interested to know. It's also a pity that Bruni did not write the direction that Bustinza described on page 201 instead of writing "We were in the woods towards the direction...(nervous tension as he describes the events)" Very helpful Georgina

[Guest]

Regarding 'UFO invasion at Rendlesham', try this, if you feel inclinded to do so and at the same time enjoy a walk around the forest, but (having watched the said documentary first). Penniston and the others claimed to have gone down route 12 (now eight). Ok, go down route 10 instead, (presently un-numbered, but its the one opposite Foley house). When you get to the second path on your right, stop, and look behind you towards the Foley house direction. Notice anything familiar? and then consider the direction Penniston points in (reference Halt's site 'almost half a mile in that direction'). If you were on route 12 you would not see the path that is shown on the next clip, but on route 10 you would, and it would be in the direction Penniston is pointing to. Incidentally directly behind you would be the site Georgina Bruni claims is the original landing site. However, Halt's site (area 3 on UFO trail) would not be along that path. Carry on to the next path on your right, just a short distance away. If this was the one Penniston was pointing to then yes Halt's site would be along this path, but nowhere near half a mile away. Interesting when Halt, Penniston and Thurkettle are talking about the lighthouse and seemingly giving the impression that they are in the area of it. If you carefully pause and slowly forward the frame you will see a road and a quick glimpse of a car upon it. That can only feasibly be either the entrance to route 12 or 10?, considering there is no road running along the farmer's field or an area to park a car. Seeing that they originally were on track 10 i would tend to say it was the latter, and bearing in mind it has been said that Penniston led the filming crew up near Foley house for filming. However, also interesting was the site they were doing the geiger readings in. Up near the farmers field i personally cannot recall any sites which would even remotely match, however, up in the area nearest to east gate and Foley house there are plenty like that. Like i said, oh for a documentary who can at least get some things right and forget the atmospherics. Rendlesham has its own natural atmospherics. Just give us something near to the truer facts.

[Guest]

What an excellent idea. A documentary getting all those involved together; pledging their honesty (despite official secrets act restrictions) and pointing out seemingly dubious areas of the forest, locked in a room with an experienced interviewer. I propose Jeremy Paxman. Give the viewers a clear tour of the forest. The true facts and research on sodium pentathal/ hypnotherapy techniques and also their limits. Someone experienced and well versed on body language to give their opinions of the indviduals as they interview. Twenty six years on and still seemingly no further forward? I think after that we would be. I'd pay good money to watch that! (Andy NOT 'guest').