[Part 2] Rendlesham explained? [Visitor Submitted Article]

[Admin]

I received a tip-off that there may have been people inside the Apollo training capsule, when OR if it was allegedly dropped into Rendlesham forest.

My source(s) wishes to remain absolutely anonymous. I have nothing else to say at the moment.

[Observer]

I know Graham Haynes of the BWCWM won't mind me saying this but he said that the capsule went missing immediately after the incident for a period of time. If i've got this wrong Graham, please put us right.
Obs

[Observer]

silvertop
When i talked to a forestry worker who was friends with my mum i asked him about the ground freezing during the winter and he said that the logging tracks usually froze up solid but the more sheltered areas under or around trees remained softer as they escaped the frost. This could account for the 3 indentations in the ground and as you said 3 tons per foot is going to leave some sort of mark in the ground.
The measurements between the 3 feet are logged so it will be interesting to see if your enquiries turn up the manufacturers measurements.
If the 2 coincide we are on a positive track.
Obs

[ghaynes]

I know Graham Haynes of the BWCWM won't mind me saying this but he said that the capsule went missing immediately after the incident for a period of time. If i've got this wrong Graham, please put us right.
Obs

Hi Obs,
That is correct. It did reappear sometime later though....as a static exhibit outside the 67th ARRS ops building.
Regards.

Graham

[Wolf]

If the pic taken from GB's book on this site is accurate (the shaded marks) then there is no way they are 12 feet apart. The British policeman shown in the picture was at least 6 ft. Therefore the added marks on the pic cannot be 12' apart (more like 8?)

http://www.rendlesham-incident.co.uk/th ... .php#marks

Having done a real rough bit of scaling on one of the pics of the boilerplate with the feet on, the legs appear to be about 8 1/4 feet apart.

OBS - there is normally a thickish layer of pine needles and other debris (ferns etc) under the trees, which acts like a blanket and normally stops the ground under the trees freezing. Also the trees act as a windbreak for themselves, so the amount of windchill tends to be less in the trees than on the tracks.

V/R

Wolf

[Observer]

Hi Wolf
Good detective work, if the feet dimensions don't add up then this is a non runner.
Your quite right, the ground was usually covered in tree debris although the area where the marks were found was sandy with a few tufts of grass.
Obs

[AdrianF]

Re, the ground temperature, I think this is largely academic. As the ground where the indentations were found was mostly sand it was less likely to have
frozen hard like the muddy logging tracks would have. If the sandy soil was dry then it wouldn't have frozen at all, if it had a high moisture content then it might have.
The surface temperature and freezing properties of the soil would be pretty variable from spot to spot, so unless we were to invent a time machine and go back, we will never know for sure.

Back to the idea that Rendlesham Incident caused itself!

Re; the crime theory, I don't want to sound like an old fart, but I see that there potentially could be pretty serious allegations made against some senior airmen. This one is going to need some pretty solid proof.

Adrian

[Observer]

Adrian
It will also need careful handling and wording so no one gets accused or libelled.
Don't forget this is just a theory and its far from being established.
Hard evidence may be impossible to find if its there at all.
I think until we know for sure if the distances between the feet tally up with the measurements taken at the scene [Wolf is working on this as i think silvertop is] we will have to wait and see.
Go easy on this one for every one's sake.
Obs

[IanR]

If the pic taken from GB's book on this site is accurate (the shaded marks) then there is no way they are 12 feet apart. The British policeman shown in the picture was at least 6 ft. Therefore the added marks on the pic cannot be 12' apart (more like 8?)

The distance between the marks that Vince Thurkettle saw was 2.5m (=8.2 ft), which agrees with your estimate. I imagine that Vince simply paced it out so his figures are only approximate. For his sketch see here:
http://www.ianridpath.com/ufo/rendlesham5.htm

At least one of the dark spots added to the photograph must be wrongly placed, as it makes the near side of the triangle much shorter than the two more distant sides.

Observer and AdrianF are both right about the soil – it is sandy, this being an old raised beach, and sand does not freeze. And the sand is overlain with dead vegetation that is easily scruffed up. In any case, we have no way of knowing whether the marks were made on the night in question or some time before.

Ian

[Observer]

The legs/feet [3] on the Apollo capsule would be equally spaced apart for stability.
If the spacings don't match up then these marks in the sand were not the capsule and were either made by some thing else or were rabbit scratchings.

Puddlepirate made an interesting comment to me some time ago where he said that the marks could have been made by the feet of a heavy lift tripod that was used to lift some thing very heavy off the ground for retrieval. Some thing on the lines of the block and tackle used to lift engines out of motor vehicles. If this was for retieval then i would have thought a truck would be needed very close by so said object could be loaded on. To do this the object would need lifting quite high and the truck backed in under neath and said object lowered on to it.
No body has ever mentioned this in any of their statements so it probably didn't happen.
Obs

[IanR]

The legs/feet [3] on the Apollo capsule would be equally spaced apart for stability.

The real Apollo Command Module didn't have feet, of course. The underside was the heat shield.

I've no idea whether the boilerplate model had feet. My own guess (and it is just a guess) is that it would not have had feet, to keep it as much like the real thing as possible, and that it was simply lowered onto a cradle for storage.

According to the listing on this page
http://web.mac.com/jimgerard/AFGAS/page ... index.html
the Woodbridge boilerplate was model no. BP-1206.

The pix of Apollo boilerplates in this Wikipedia page are not much help
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boilerplate_%28rocketry%29

However, the pictures on this page
http://tinyurl.com/5tso8a
which include the Woodbridge BP show one boilerplate model turned upside down and it clearly has no feet.

Hope this is of use.

Ian

[Observer]

I heard it had feet when it was on display outside the ARRS HQ.
Perhaps Graham Haynes can enlighten us.
Obs

[AdrianF]

In the description of boilerplate 1210 ( the upturned one with no feet ) it says
"This particular boilerplate, BP1210, was used in landing and recovery training"

It seems that if the ARRS were using their module in a similar way, then it probably didn't have feet, until it was displayed.

Adrian

[IanR]

Ian, I put it to you that Vince Thurkettle was not shown the same sight.

That, of course, raises the question: how many similar sets of marks were there in that forest? And how can anyone distinguish between natural indentations and those made by a landed UFO?

You might also ask why Gulyas's description of the site is inconsistent with what appears on his photograph. Did he take the police to a different site? For that matter, was Halt taken to the wrong site?

Ian

[AdrianF]

I read it ( from Georgina Bruni's account ) that Ray Gulyas, visited and photographed the site twice, once the photos were fogged, secondly to photograph and develop the film privately ie, off base. The police visited the site twice on the morning of the 26th, once whilst it was still dark and then later that morning to investigate the alleged landing site.

These photographs were taken in winter daylight ( it looks as though a flash was used ) and presumably the later visit of the Suffolk police on the 26th. So where were the other photos he took, taken and when? Was there a one hour photo service on base at the time, that allowed Guylas to take the initial photos in the dark, which maybe showed little and then he returned in daylight with Suffolk PCs to a different location??

Re; the indentations. There are three different measurements that I can see, Vince Thurkettle at 2.5m, Jim Penniston estimated 3m and Guylas 12ft ( though this photo suggests less )

Adrian

[Observer]

Ian
I have spoken to all the Rabbits and they said we did not do the marks. They said check out the Badgers so i did but they said no as well but i should try the foxes which i did, but they were too Foxy to give a straight answer.
Obs
Ps, i still have a couple of hares and a Deer to check out but cannot find them. It may be the 'Weird' creatures in Rendlesham forest that no body has ever seen. I'l keep you posted.

[ghaynes]

I heard it had feet when it was on display outside the ARRS HQ.
Perhaps Graham Haynes can enlighten us.
Obs

Yes, it had feet when it was put on display. As Ian and Adrian said, I doubt whether it had feet when it was used as a training capsule.
Wolf posted a pic of the capsule at Woodbridge (together with feet) in another thread a while back.
Regards.

Graham

[Observer]

Its looking more and more unlikely that the marks in the forest floor were made by the 3 feet on the Apollo capsule, if it had feet fitted at that time?
Having said that they were too symetrical for an animal to have made them. Did they use a heavy lift tripod to lift the capsule onto a truck.
The capsule was very heavy and could account for the indentations in the sandy soil by the tripod feet.
Other than that, some thing else made those marks which is either very significant or the rabbits had lessons in geometry.
Obs

[Wolf]

Other than that, some thing else made those marks which is either very significant or the rabbits had lessons in geometry

It may have been less of a "UFO crash" and more or a "Watership Down...."

Wolf

[Observer]

Thanks Wolf for your humerous response, i was being flippant only to lighten the mood. I'm sorry but on occasions its hard to keep a straight face.
Obs