Visual and radar confirmed ufo sightings

Discussion in 'UFOs, Ghosts and Monsters' started by Magical Realist, May 24, 2016.

  1. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,688
    LOL! We can also positively identify a ufo at different times, as in "hey that moving star is a lot closer now and has flashing colored lights and a cylindrical shape."
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,688
    The people who saw one object disappear and the other rise up into sky confirm the object was no longer visible. Which is also confirmed by the pilots, who then tracked the object by radar evading pursuit with amazing maneuvers. The radars confirm the behavior of the now non-visible object. Is this sinking in yet?
     
    Last edited: May 25, 2016
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,688
    "Case 2, Lakenheath, Britain. 1956.

    One of the most sensational cases of Radar- Visual sighting occurred in Britain in 1956. An unusual object was tracked on radar travelling at a speed of at least 4000 miles an hour. The object was witnessed by duty personnel in the control tower and also by the crew of a passing C-47 aircraft. As the object became stationary in the sky it was picked up by numerous other radar operators, who were astonished to see it go from point to point in bursts of speed of at least 600 m.p.h. In the words of the principal witness: "There was no slow start up or build up to this speed - it was constant from the second it started to move until it stopped."

    By this time the object had excited a great deal of interest and set the phone lines buzzing between numerous air bases. It was decided to scramble two RAF interceptors to investigate. The first of the pilots to sight the target managed to lock on his guns, but the UFO instantly vanished from sight, only to reappear behind him moments later. At this instant a second UFO appeared on the radar scopes.

    Now feeling under threat the interceptor pilot fought desperately to shake off the UFO's, but all to no avail. In the words of one witness: "He tried everything - he climbed, dived, circled, etc, but the UFO acted like it was glued right behind him, always the same distance, very close, but we always had two distinct targets."

    By this time the pilot was understandably concerned. In the words of a radar operator: "He continued to comment occasionally and we could tell from the tonal quality he was getting worried, excited, and also pretty scared." This aerial game of cat and mouse lasted until the RAF plane broke off the engagement to return to base through lack of fuel. Meanwhile the second interceptor which had been in the air for a far shorter period developed an engine malfunction and was immediately forced back to base. At this point the two UFO's, still being tracked by radar became stationary in the sky before hurtling northwards and out of contact at speeds in excess of 600 m.p.h.

    The Colorado University report concluded: "The preponderance of evidence indicates the possibility of a genuine UFO in this case." It added : "In summary this is the most puzzling and unusual case in the Radar-Visual files. The apparently rational, intelligent behaviour of the UFO suggests a mechanical device of unknown origin as the most probable explanation of this sighting."====http://www.ufoevidence.org/documents/doc498.htm
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,688
    "AIRLINE PILOTS SEE THEM AND RADAR CONFIRMS IT ALL
    Part One


    By DOUGLAS LARSEN
    NEA Staff Correspondent

    WASHINGTON (NEA) - The flying saucers are back. And their return to the headlines has been the result of a startling new development:

    For the first time, numerous and simultaneous visual sightings have been positively confirmed by official Civil Aeronautics Administration radar observations. This has happened twice under almost identical circumstances on two successive Saturday nights.

    Up until now, official and unofficial saucer debunkers have produced credible theories to explain away reports of visual sightings as natural phenomena. They have done the same for individual radar sighting reports.

    But none of this reasoning satisfactorily explains away visual sightings absolutely confirmed by radar.

    This remarkable new chapter in the weird flying saucer story was written in the skies over Washington for six hours before dawn on Sunday, July 20. and again one week later. The details and implications of what took place are now confirmed by CAA and the Air Force.

    Since then, the Air Force has quietly said it was closing to the press its special section at Wright Field in Dayton, O., which has been studying flying saucer reports. In addition, all information concerning that group's personnel, activities and budget is now strictly classified.

    Full details of what happened the first night are being revealed for the first time by NEA Service.

    These are the facts:

    Beginning shortly after midnight, and continuing until dawn, eight experienced CAA radar operators and technicians, manning the air route traffic control center in hanger No. 6 at National Airport, tracked from seven to ten unidentifiable and mysterious objects performing strange gyrations in the skies in a 30-mile radius above Washington.

    Harry G. Barnes, who has been with CAA for nine years, mostly in radar work, was in charge of the group. After making sure that the objects were not known aircraft and that the radar was operating perfectly, he checked his findings with the radar operators in the control tower. They instantly confirmed what he saw, and continued to do so. The two radars are completely separate units.

    Later, the radar at nearby Andrews Air Force base also confirmed the sightings.

    When the center radar showed one of the unidentified objects in a low position in the northwest sky, the operators in the tower were able to see it. One of them, Howard Cocklin, who has been with CAA for five years, describes it:

    "It was a good-sized light, yellow to orange in color. At first, it looked like a great big star. Then it began to move in a manner which made you realize it couldn't be a star. There was no unusual high speed about its movements and at times, it seemed to hover. We could see it moving around like that for about 15 minutes. It just disappeared into the northwest sky."

    There are no windows in the center Barnes was operating. None of the eight men could leave to go outside to try to check their own radar sightings visually.

    As is normal at that time, air traffic was very light. But at the first opportunity, an operator in Barnes' office contacted Capital Airlines pilot Capt. S. C. Pierman shortly after he took off and asked him to look for the objects.

    For about 14 minutes, Pierman was in direct, two-way communication with Barnes. While he was within radar range, Pierman was able to see six objects which showed up on the path indicated by the center's radar. Pierman's sightings reported to Barnes coincided exactly with the radar sightings, Barnes reports.

    Pierman is a 17-year veteran of commercial flying and is described by Capital Airlines officials as very level-headed and "taciturn." After he landed in Detroit, Pierman had this to say about the sightings:

    "In my years of flying, I've seen a lot of falling or shooting stars - whatever you call them - but these were much faster than anything like that I've ever seen. They were about the same size as the brighter stars. And they were much higher than our 6000-foot altitude. I couldn't estimate the speed accurately. Please remember I didn't speak of them as flying saucers - only very fast moving lights."

    Charles Wheaton, first officer on the flight with Pierman, a veteran of 12 years of flying confirms Pierman's sightings and adds:

    "Before the other night, I always discounted alleged flying saucers as atmospheric phenomenon. But now I feel I have actually seen some active strange objects which defy explanation."

    Another Capital Airlines pilot also reported seeing a light off his wing, which showed up in that position on the radar scope. Other pilots in the air that night, Barnes reveals, appeared to be reluctant to discuss the subject with him on the radio.

    The mystery of the flying saucers had its start on June 24, 1947, when a Boise, Idaho, businessman, Kenneth Arnold, flew his private plane over the jagged peaks of Washington's Mt. Rainier. When he landed, he breathlessly reported having seen "a chain of nine saucer-like objects playing tag at fantastic speeds."

    Since then, there have been thousands of sightings all over the world, many obviously reported by crackpots. But a substantial number have been so strange ands reliably described, even the Air Force has had to admit that they were unexplainable.

    Many books have been written on the subject. Hundreds of magazine articles have treated all aspects of the question. However, a review of most of what has been written and officially reported on the subject points up several unique aspects to the recent Washington sightings:

    It's the first time that three separate radar sets have reported identical sightings.

    It's the first time they have remained under observation in one area for so long a time.

    It's the first time so many completely responsible men, including radar operators and pilots, all observed and reported the same thing at the same time, with all reports checking so accurately.

    Both nights, there were scores of unofficial stories of persons in the area who claim to have seen one or more strange lights moving about in the sky.

    Saul Pett, a news service reporter in River Edge, N.J., wrote a detailed story on one that he saw just before seven objects appeared on the CAA radar screen at National Airport. He said:

    "It looked like a sphere, so deeply orange colored that it appeared almost the shade of rust. It was silent as death. It was moving too fast and evenly to be a balloon. I saw a flying saucer and you can't convince me that there is no such animal."

    He said it disappeared in the direction of Washington."===http://www.noufors.com/radar_visual_sightings_of_ufos.html
     
  8. sideshowbob Sorry, wrong number. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,587
    You seem to misunderstand the "U" in UFO. If visual sightings are confirmed by radar, they're still unidentified.
     
  9. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,688
  10. sideshowbob Sorry, wrong number. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,587
    They can be identified as unidentified? Seriously?

    No, they can not be identified, which is why they are called UNidentified. And it can not be concluded that they are spaceships either.
     
  11. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,688
    They can be identified as ufos, defined as a given:

    "a mysterious object seen in the sky for which, it is claimed, no orthodox scientific explanation can be found."

    Example: "It wasn't a plane or a balloon. It was a UFO."

    If I say I saw an unidentified man in a black hat, I'd at least know it was a man in a black hat. Same with unidentified flying object. We have identified the subject as a flying object that is unidentified. It isn't anything. It isn't nothing. It is a UFO, a word that has taken on a specific meaning over the years to refer to an otherworldly visitation by a mysterious craft.
     
    Last edited: May 27, 2016
  12. sideshowbob Sorry, wrong number. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,587
    Not quite. We have observed something which appears to be an object and which appears to be flying. It might be a reflection, which is not an object, or it might be the moon, which is not flying (per se). It is not identified.

    Only to the gullible. To the realist, unidentified means unidentified and speculation remains speculation. Speculation is not identification.
     
  13. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,688
    Uh no. A reflection is not a ufo and neither is the moon. Those are identified things, and are certainly not flying objects.

    Which is why we call it unidentified flying object.
     
  14. Daecon Kiwi fruit Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,133
    Right, so you can't identify it as an otherworldly craft just because.
     
  15. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,703

    You are obfuscating and playing with words......
    what was said.............
    "which appears to be an object....It might be a reflection.... or it might be the moon,"
    So no certainty in anyway, which means it is Unidentified and a UFO.......
    It might even be extraterrestrial or might even be extradimensional, but until some certainty can be applied, it is still a UFO, vanilla flavoured....
     
  16. Kittamaru Suppose it makes sense. Wearing a bit thin. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,938
    I highly doubt MR actually understands the intricacies of how RADAR works... like, for example, that sufficiently sized water droplets can cause radar reflections and refraction... case in point, some of the lower frequency radar bands (which have been found to aid in detecting new generation stealth aircraft) have a much higher return overall, which can result in a lot of noise from undesirable sources. The higher the frequency, the more accurate - the lower the frequency, the better the range (to an extent) and the more sensitive it is (larger return).

    Something interesting to note - a rounded spacecraft like the classic UFO would have an outrageous radar cross-section.
     
  17. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,688
    LOL! I was a radar technician in the Navy for 9 years. I think I know how radar works.
     
  18. Daecon Kiwi fruit Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,133
    [citation needed]
     
  19. Kittamaru Suppose it makes sense. Wearing a bit thin. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,938
    Got anything to back that up? A DOD ID number + rank/insignia or some other proof would be permissible.
     
  20. cluelusshusbund + Public Dilemma + Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,904
    Did you ever have to remove so many screws from pannels on radar equipment you thout you'r arm woud fall off... lol.!!!
     
  21. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,688
    YES! Changed out the magnetron once too. That thing had 20,000 volts!
     
  22. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,688
    Hold your breath troll..lol!
     
    cluelusshusbund likes this.
  23. Kittamaru Suppose it makes sense. Wearing a bit thin. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,938
    in other words, you don't have anything... I'd wager that was nothing more than an attempt at Stolen Valor... disgusting. Prove me wrong - if you were actually in the military, it will be simple to do. If you don't, well, it just shows the depths you are willing to sink to in your deceit.
     

Share This Page