RADAR Development

General discussion about the Rendlesham forest incident

RADAR Development

Postby robert » Thu Jul 24, 2008 11:59 am

Following Quotes from Source : http://www.thespacereview.com/article/790/1

(By the early 1980s, the Air Force was interested in a new project then designated Space Based Radar, or SBR. This was a project championed by Air Force Space Command, not the Air Force office that was part of the NRO. The purpose of Space Based Radar was to detect aircraft in flight. The justification was that such a satellite could act as a kind of space-based airborne warning and control, or AWACS, system, detecting Soviet bombers and tactical aircraft in flight long before they could be spotted by ground-based radars in Europe and elsewhere.

Throughout the 1980s, various Air Force generals declared that Space Based Radar was their highest priority new program. Despite this constant endorsement, the proposal was never adopted by the Air Force leadership or the Secretary of Defense for actual development. When the Cold War ended, the fundamental justification for the program evaporated and Space Based Radar was dead.)



(Articles by independent analysts contained some inaccurate speculation about radar satellites during this period. In 1977, NASA launched a radar satellite known as Seasat and used to observe the oceans. Seasat failed early in its mission, and there has long been speculation that the satellite had successfully detected American submarines at sea and this was so alarming that it prompted the Navy and/or the intelligence community to demand that the satellite be shut off. However, this story seems highly unlikely. If the satellite had been so successful, it seems more likely that the military and intelligence communities would have wanted it to continue in order to gather more data. At the very least, they would have wanted to try and track Soviet submarines. They could have easily classified the data while keeping the satellite in operation. There has been enough information released on Seasat’s failure to make it clear that a simple malfunction, and not a government conspiracy, was the real problem.)

(Satellite radar imaging is among the most classified activities conducted by the US intelligence community. The NRO will not even acknowledge the “fact of” the existence of such a capability. However, it is no secret that space radar is possible. Canada, Russia, ESA, and recently Germany have all launched radar satellites. The United States flew several civilian Space Shuttle missions equipped with a radar imager and some of this equipment currently hangs in the Smithsonian. The mission these various spacecraft have performed is producing imagery of the ground using a technique known as synthetic aperture radar, or SAR, whereby multiple images of the ground are taken as the satellite moves overhead and are then stitched together by computer, producing a high-fidelity three-dimensional image. But while the space radar efforts of other countries are relatively well known, in the United States information on the operational systems is shrouded in secrecy, and most of what we know concerns canceled programs).
robert
 
Posts: 211
Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2008 7:53 am
Location: Sheffield. Yorkshire

Re: RADAR Development

Postby robert » Thu Jul 24, 2008 12:07 pm

Maybe DARPA or Qinetic were trialling Airships equipped with Radar and Lasers!
Didn't Qinetic take over Bawdsey from the MOD?

Robert




http://www.darpa.mil/sto/space/isis.html
Integrated Sensor is Structure (ISIS)

Program Manager: Mr. Timothy Clark

The goal of the ISIS program is to develop a stratospheric airship based autonomous unmanned sensor with years of persistence in surveillance and tracking of air and ground targets. It will have the capability to track the most advanced cruise missiles at 600 km and dismounted enemy combatants at 300 km. The ISIS program will develop the technologies that enable extremely large lightweight phased-array radar antennas to be integrated into an airship platform. ISIS uses a large aperture instead of high power to meet radar performance requirements. This approach exploits the platform's size and conforms to the platform's limitations on weight and power. Major technical challenges are the development of ultra-lightweight antennas, antenna calibration technologies, power systems, station keeping approaches, and airships that support extremely large antennas.
robert
 
Posts: 211
Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2008 7:53 am
Location: Sheffield. Yorkshire

Re: RADAR Development

Postby Observer » Thu Jul 24, 2008 1:42 pm

Interesting as i suggested [as a theory] that an air ship may have been involved with the RFI.
This was your standard helium filled airship, the type Goodyear sold rides on. They were about before 1980.
Was this the large object seen over the forest by the Bentwaters control tower duty crew and at 2 miles in the dark it would be hard to distiguish.
These airships though were very prone to weather conditions and anything above a breeze would blow them off course. Even with their powerful ducted fan engines they would struggle to maintain a heading.
I also think that it would have a pretty good radar signature.
Obs
Observer
 
Posts: 1284
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2006 12:31 pm
Location: Woodbridge Suffolk, now London.

Re: RADAR Development

Postby Observer » Thu Jul 24, 2008 1:45 pm

Forget to say,
Try looking at what the Royal Radar Establishment were doing in those days.
Obs
Observer
 
Posts: 1284
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2006 12:31 pm
Location: Woodbridge Suffolk, now London.

Re: RADAR Development

Postby John Burroughs » Thu Jul 24, 2008 8:46 pm

Observer
To follow up on your question on could they be working on this kind of Tech came across 2 articles one was about a guy named H. Grindell British working on a ray that could stop gasoline engines popular science Aug 1924 pg 33. And Guglielmo Marconi was working with ELF 1936 and showed a ability to penetrate metallic shielding. all of his reasearch disapeared after ww2. Marconi company in 1936 rays in 1926 British it looks like by 1980 we had the ability to do that!!
John Burroughs
 
Posts: 964
Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2008 9:16 pm

Re: RADAR Development

Postby John Burroughs » Thu Jul 24, 2008 10:36 pm

Also look at QH-50 Gyrodyne and the BQM-147a Exdrone and how it was launched both UVA and operational at that time
John Burroughs
 
Posts: 964
Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2008 9:16 pm

Re: RADAR Development

Postby Observer » Thu Jul 24, 2008 10:41 pm

John
Thanks for your research, there is some very BLACK projects going on on the subject of sound waves and electronic weapons including ELF but a more scientific brain than i have needs to have a look and then try to interpret it with the RFI. I guess Marconi at that time would be one of many companies doing weapon research. No BLACK secrets are ever going to be on the net no matter how many web sites you see as it is always going to be a guess not fact.
Obs
Observer
 
Posts: 1284
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2006 12:31 pm
Location: Woodbridge Suffolk, now London.

Re: RADAR Development

Postby AdrianF » Thu Jul 24, 2008 11:02 pm

BQM-147a Exdrone


Image

Image

Wing Span 8 feet 2 inches

Well I guess this one does tick a couple of boxes. It's flight characteristics don't quite match what you guys reported though?

Image


Cheers

Adrian
AdrianF
 
Posts: 330
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2008 2:57 pm

Re: RADAR Development

Postby John Burroughs » Thu Jul 24, 2008 11:06 pm

Yes they would but his reasearch at the time also showed ELF caused effects on electrical devices overload circuits cause machine like generators elect motors and autos to stall. There was a marconi site just outside Bentwaters one of the dead scientist was involved with UAV . look at the BQM-147a does it not look alot like what penniston described. And the QH-50 was a helicopter UAV did warren not say he heard a helicopter.
John Burroughs
 
Posts: 964
Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2008 9:16 pm

Re: RADAR Development

Postby John Burroughs » Thu Jul 24, 2008 11:08 pm

Does not have to we may never have seen it take off if they were using EM or ELF on us remember it effects the brain. Also take a look at Radiosonde. Can you PM I have a question for you...
John Burroughs
 
Posts: 964
Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2008 9:16 pm

Re: RADAR Development

Postby robert » Fri Jul 25, 2008 7:49 am

Department of the Army Historical Summary: FY 1980

Research, Development, and Acquisition

Planning and Budgeting


The ASB advises the Secretary of the Army and Chief of Staff on research and development directions and programs, system acquisition policies and procedures, and other matters pertaining to science and engineering. The basic missions and policies of the ASB are to provide technical review and management support to major Army programs in critical need of DA attention; to furnish quick reaction technical review and assessment of major program initiatives; to keep the Army alert to new science and technology developments in industry; and to consult on science and technology, Army laboratory performance, and scientific papers.

Vertical lift technology was assessed under ASB auspices by a DOD team, with input from industry providing significant direction for future research and development.



In fiscal year 1980 the SNOW-ONE (scenario naturalization for operation in winter-obscuration and the natural environment) exercise technical plan was developed and completed. SNOW-ONE is the first in a series of field experiments designed to explore the influence of winter terrain conditions on the propagation of directed electromagnetic energy for military purposes

The Advanced Technology Program is directed toward the research and development of BMD components and subsystems, including radar and optical sensors, unique discrimination techniques, hardware and software for data processing, and interceptor missiles. Some of the more advanced technological activities were the designating optical tracker (DOT) program; the endoatmospheric nonnuclear kill program; the forward acquisition system integrated ground test program; a millimeter wave radar; Cobra Judy, a shipborne radar signature collection system; the optical aircraft measurement program; and exploration of directed energy weapons, such as the particle beam program

Fabrication was completed on all major radar subsystems for the jointly funded Cobra Judy, which is designed to provide intelligence data for the U.S. Air Force Systems Command Foreign Technology Division and for the BMD Advanced Technology Center (BMDATC). These subsystems are being integrated for testing. The U.S.S. Observation Island was towed to the Maryland Shipbuilding and Dry Dock Company, refurbished, and made seaworthy. It meets all the requirements for the Cobra Judy platform. Modification of the ship is in progress including installation of the radar array turret.

Objectives of the optical aircraft measurements program are development and implementation of an airborne measurement system capable of providing exoatmospheric and early reentry infrared data on BMD targets. This data will be used as a base for development and evaluation of discrimination techniques. In fiscal year 1980, the BMDATC published an “Optical Aircraft Measurements Program Management Plan” documenting program objectives, the preliminary concept, and the proposed plan of implementation. A determination of the requirements for the aircraft platform and the infrared sensor was under way at the end of the year. Infrared radiation from the upper atmosphere (above the ceiling of the aircraft platform) was also being measured and modeled to determine its effect on the sensor. Results of these measurements will aid in deconvolution of the atmospheric noise from the target signature measurements. Approximately 80 percent of the planned sky noise measurements are completed. A site survey assessing available aircraft basing facilities and determining additional requirements has been completed and a request made for military construction authority to provide for the additional basing requirements.

Overall responsibility for the particle beam program was assigned to the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) at the end of fiscal year 1980. For DARPA, the BMDATC will primarily perform technical management and serve as procurement agent for two major efforts: the Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory exoatmospheric neutral particle beam accelerator program and the Austin Research Associates collective ion accelerator proof-of-principle experiment known as the auto-resonant accelerator. The Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory had made significant advances in ion source development and was nearing completion of facilities to house the accelerator test stand which will be used to test the major components of the neutral particle beam accelerator when the year ended. Austin Research Associates had made substantial progress in its high gradient accelerator experiment by characterizing the electron beam, and exciting, detecting, and identifying the specific cyclotron wave which is required for ion trapping and acceleration

One of two Standoff Target Acquisition Systems (SOTAS) in advanced development participated in Operation ANORAK EXPRESS (February-March 1980), a multinational NATO field exercise in Norway. The exercise tested the system’s ability to deploy tactically (in C-5 aircraft) and to operate in the rugged terrain and arctic climate of northern Norway. The operation was successful on both counts. In the SOTAS engineering development program, the radar design successfully passed the “Proof of Principle” demonstration. All major systems progressed through both the preliminary and the critical design review phases. The basic design for all components has been approved. The first UH-60 Blackhawk airplane was modified to a YEH-60B configuration and flown with a dummy antenna. Fullscale mockup of the airborne and ground station subsystem were completed

Since World War II, almost no work has been done in fixed-installation camouflage. Increased potential adversary air strength and advances in thermal infrared and microwave target acquisition devices have now put a premium on concealment and deception. Under authority of AR 530-1, the Corps of Engineers is conducting a program to update the Army’s capability in fixed-installation camouflage. The program involves two major NATO groups and emphasizes techniques to defeat manned aircraft employing visual, infrared or microwave target acquisition devices by camouflage of key elements at installations. Theoretical modeling work and field data collection efforts are being combined in a field trial under the NATO Special Group of Experts for Camouflage, Concealment, and Deception. The Corps is directing this experiment in which West Germany, the United Kingdom, The Netherlands, and Denmark are participating.
robert
 
Posts: 211
Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2008 7:53 am
Location: Sheffield. Yorkshire

Re: RADAR Development

Postby AdrianF » Fri Jul 25, 2008 8:31 am

Robert

Is this an online document? If so do you have a link?

Cheers
Adrian
AdrianF
 
Posts: 330
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2008 2:57 pm

Re: RADAR Development

Postby robert » Fri Jul 25, 2008 8:36 am

AdrianF wrote:Robert

Is this an online document? If so do you have a link?

Cheers
Adrian


Yes I've got it some where.

I'll put it up soon as.

Cheers

Robert

Think this is it. A load more info. Other years as well I presume.Thank god for Fiscal accountability!

http://www.history.army.mil/books/dahsum/1980/ch11.htm
robert
 
Posts: 211
Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2008 7:53 am
Location: Sheffield. Yorkshire

Re: RADAR Development

Postby AdrianF » Fri Jul 25, 2008 8:56 am

Thanks Robert,

Will read through this more thoroughly.

Adrian
AdrianF
 
Posts: 330
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2008 2:57 pm

Re: RADAR Development

Postby AdrianF » Fri Jul 25, 2008 11:01 am

This photo made me smile

Image

If short range battlefield UAVs were being tested at the time at the twin bases, then according to current guidelines ( and I guess common sense ), no other aircraft should have been flying at the time.
http://www.vectorsite.net/twuav_18.html

Adrian
AdrianF
 
Posts: 330
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2008 2:57 pm

Re: RADAR Development

Postby Observer » Fri Jul 25, 2008 1:25 pm

Looking at the picture of the Exdrone posted by Adrianf reminds me of some of the RC models i fly occasionally. If you look at the German Graupner range of models you will see very similar models to the Exdrone but a 10th of the size. Some of the Graupner kits are used by the military as UAV's for battle field surveillance and are made from Styrofoam.
The picture also shows it was powered by an IC [Glow plug] engine probably around .120 ci or bigger. This looks to be straight out of the aero model world and this is probably where they gained the expertise. Aero modellers were often enrolled as design consultants.
Today, most of these will be powered by electric motors and are re startable in the air where as the IC engine is not. An ic engine aloft is very recognisable, i'm sure many of you have heard them, but an electric one is different, its hums.
Also the servos, receivers etc. would be quite large as would the battery pack [probably NiCad] back in 1980 but now all those components fall into the micro miniture catigory.
Radio gear in those days was proportional but not digital. Digital came along in the early 90's
Obs
Observer
 
Posts: 1284
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2006 12:31 pm
Location: Woodbridge Suffolk, now London.

Re: RADAR Development

Postby AdrianF » Sat Jul 26, 2008 11:10 am

One of the images that I wasn't allowed to link to, was of a small UAV and it appeared to be manouvering through a pine forest. The image can be viewed if you follow the link.


Adrian
AdrianF
 
Posts: 330
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2008 2:57 pm

Re: RADAR Development

Postby robert » Sun Jul 27, 2008 12:15 pm

Not exactly Radar, more NATO Commiunication Development but the Sites worth a look.

Robert

http://www.subbrit.org.uk/rsg/features/ ... ndex4.html

The station noted as Martlesham Heath (Suffolk) has nothing to do with the BT research station but was at the USAF base along the Foxhill road; it had local microwave feeders to/from Great Bromley & RAF Bentwaters. Collafirth Hill is in the Shetlands, where a branch of the network went to Sola in Norway.

THE FUNCTION OF ACE HIGH
Duncan Campbell's book The Unsinkable Aircraft Carrier provides an insight into the applications for ACE HIGH (pages 188 and 62).

The main NATO international network is Ace High, a troposcatter relay network which has five British Stations in a chain from Sumburgh in the Shetlands to Coldblow Lane, near Maidstone. The Ace High network was built in the early 1960s, primarily in order tolink NATO heads of state together in crisis. Two of twelve US/NATO interconnection sites are in the UK, at Mormond Hill Aberdeen and Coldblow Lane.

From a site at Swingate in Dover, high on the celebrated chalk cliffs and overlooking the busy harbour and medieval castle, US Air Force transmitters beamed signals towards their counterpart networks run by the US Army and Air Force in France. This link ran on to US bases at Orleans and Bordeaux. A second connection to the Continent was made in March 1962, when a new communications station, at Martlesham Heath near Ipswich (Suffolk), was linked to Flobecq in Belgium.
robert
 
Posts: 211
Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2008 7:53 am
Location: Sheffield. Yorkshire

Re: RADAR Development

Postby Observer » Sun Jul 27, 2008 2:25 pm

The Martlesham heath USAF Coms site [now derelict, but parts recently opened as museum] is actually in a Farmers field with the entrance off Foxhall road, a hundred yards from where Bell lane intersects with Foxhall road. Its not quite in the Martlesham Heath area, more Foxhall. Nothing sinister about this place or any of the others mentioned. This site was discussed on the forum by several members a long time ago.
Obs
Observer
 
Posts: 1284
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2006 12:31 pm
Location: Woodbridge Suffolk, now London.

Re: RADAR Development

Postby robert » Sun Jul 27, 2008 3:07 pm

http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=834V ... lt#PPT8,M1

If you click on the link there are several Lecturers involved from Marconi.

"Proceedings of the NATO Advanced Study Institute on New Concepts in Multi-User Communication, Norwich, UK, August 4-16, 1980"--Verso t.p
Several Scientists involved fro Marconi.

(Possible Crypto security for transferring computer data to Satellite systems? Robert)

Orbital Test Statellite OTS was lauched in 1978.

SPINE is a Space information Network experiment run on OTS.


http://www.trust-us.ch/cryptome/01-Cryp ... d-mids.htm
http://www.global-defence-review.com/DataLink.html

Fighter aircraft, ground forces and anti-aircraft weapons all operate within the same battle area and to be effective in their individual missions all must know their own location and the geo-graphic relationships with friendly and hostile forces. It is imperative that accurate information is shared immediately. To meet the command and control needs of these fast-moving forces, huge amounts of data must be exchanged between automated systems.

Joint tactical information distribution system
The first JTIDS terminal was developed in 1974 to service large command control facilities and platforms such as the E-3 AWACS. The terminal was designated as class 1 and was a large rack-mounted unit that employed an early version message protocol called Interim JTIDS message standard
GEC-Marconi Hazeltine and Rockwell began development of the class 2 fighter-sized terminal in 1980 that initially was planned for installation in the F-15 air superiority fighter. In the intervening years, the class 2 was improved to allow it to provide Link 16 to other platforms and systems including the Tornado, UK Air Defense Ground Environment, F-14D, modular control equipment, ABCCC, Joint STARS and USN submarines.


http://www.mindcontrolforums.com/pro-fr ... tners.html

the nature of the UKUSA Agreement has provided its organs with a unique autonomy and ability to pry into any avenue that proves interesting. Top-secret military bases such as Pine Gap, Nurrungar and Menwith Hill operate under the UKUSA pact. So, too, does the clandestine National Security Agency (NSA). Research conducted for the "Star Wars" project, now linked with the deaths of 22 defence scientists, is also conducted under the auspices of the UKUSA Agreement.

The initial idea of the agreement was to carve up the globe into spheres of cryptological influence. Each country was assigned specific targets according to its potential for maximum intercept coverage. UKUSA brought together, under a single umbrella, the SIGINT (signals intelligence) organisations of the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, Australia and New Zealand. In recent years, Japan, Korea and NATO nations have joined the pact.

Prior to the UKUSA Agreement, an arrangement known as BRUSA existed. BRUSA formalised cooperation between British and US COMINT (communications intelligence) agencies.

Although top secret, news of the UKUSA Agreement leaked quickly to Moscow through Kim Philby. As one American intelligence officer put it, the UKUSA Agreement was "like opening up a party line to Moscow centre" (Costello, 1988, p.516).

Between 1982 and 1988, 22 British defence scientists died in mysterious circumstances. Most of the scientists were employees of General Electric or its subsidiary, Marconi. Some were undertaking contract work for the Defence Ministry. Marconi specialises in simulation techniques both in space and underwater - processes fundamental to the Strategic Defence Initiative. Industry sources believe that many of the scientists' work involved computer software programmes designed to guide or intercept projectiles, both undersea and airborne.


The British Opposition has tied scientists' deaths to research for the Strategic Defence Initiative, claiming that some were working on aspects of underwater vibration implications which have extensive implications for SDI, while others were involved in SDI-related research on computer-controlled radar.



Signatories to the UKUSA Agreement have a long standing interest in underwater activities. One project, Desktop, involves surveillance of a "mysterious Soviet undersea operation". The only official statement ever released about the project states that it is an extremely sensitive analysis programme dealing with foreign activity." The code-word, Holystone, also designates highly sensitive undersea operations.
robert
 
Posts: 211
Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2008 7:53 am
Location: Sheffield. Yorkshire

Next

Return to The Rendlesham forest incident

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests