Revisiting The Calvine UFO Photo...Definitive Proof Removed By UK's Ministry of Defence?

Sry if this may be off-topic but I don't know if I trust Nick Pope - X-Ministry of Defense being allowed to talk about all this stuff with so much visibility.

Aside from the obvious TDAMH explanation on anything that corroborates the story- the idea that the only clear image of a UFO (with added Harrier for perspective) hung on some junior civil servants wall unchallenged is well beyond belief.

UK MoD Civil Servants are not operating from SCIF's- everyone in the building from the char lady to the printer guy must have seen this picture.

Weirdly - for a picture that could certainly be termed "memorable" if real - Pope seems to be the only ex MoD employee to remember it/ talk about it.

a reply to: Arbitrageur

Well that area of Scotland has heavy traffic main route to the Highlands & places like Inverness so I will take a huge pinch of salt with that one, have seen the RAF on exercise and used to travel on that road twice a month over a period of a few years.

Any chance of this case being one of final 3 cases the UK won't release their files on?

a reply to: Brian4real

The relevant files (according to the UK MoD) have been released as per details included in the opening post.

.....The MoD files that contain documents relating to this case have been released and are available at the National Archives, though MoD says that no trace has been found of the images, aside from one poor quality photocopy of a line drawing that was done as part of the original MoD investigation. The documents can be found in the following National Archives files: DEFE 24/1940/1 - page 114 DEFE 31/179/1 - pages 157-8 DEFE 31/180 - pages 55-57 DEFE 31/180/1 - pages 37-38....

If it was such a secret I doubt a junior desk officer (Nick Pope) at the MoD would be allowed to keep a picture of it on their wall/desk.

ETA : Here is a loose minute dated 4th Sept 1990 (taken from DEFE 24/1940/1) discussing alerting the Under Secretary of State (Armed Forces) that the Daily Record were going to run a story with the photos. However, despite 'no definite conclusions' being reached over what the large object in the photos was , the understated tone of the letter suggests that there really was little concern about it.

a reply to: shawmanfromny

This is a new one to me. Thanks!

It’s ‘legit’ in that there were clearly photos taken and handed over to the gubmit...now they are ‘gone’? You can’t make this stuff up...OR can you?!

a reply to: Cravens

No it's even odder than that.

Photos were taken and sent into a newspaper and the RAF...

A junior desk officer (Nick Pope) was allowed to display one of these photo on his office wall for an undetermined time until a superior removed it.

Someone in the MoD was tasked with making line drawings from the negatives.

The harrier aircraft in the photos could not be identified (assuming the 9pm 4th Aug 1990 timing was correct)

In July 1996, prompted by Nick Pope’s anecdotes, British MP Martin Redmond, asked questions on the Calvine photographs in Parliament.

It was decided that whole affair was of no defence significance and the case was closed.

a reply to: mirageman

So the harrier couldn't be identified?

That's pretty interesting tbh, every time I've read about this case it leaves me scratching my head a bit. Eyebrow raising stuff.

Always wanted to see the original picture.

My Dad recently told me about his experience with this incident. We live in Perth - around 45 minutes from the sighting. My Dad used to work up north often and travelled the A9 regurarly.

On the day of question he was traveling home and whilst passing Ballinluig(5 miles south of Pitlochry) his van engine cut out, the radio went off and the van clock stopped. It restarted soon after and never had this issue again.

He never seen any UFO's and wasn't even aware there was one until he seen the news reports. To this day he believes whatever the UFO was caused his van to malfunction.

Very interesting!

Hovering silently is something that humans achieved well over 200 years ago with balloons.

I always find it puzzling that this is immediately assumed to be the result of amazingly exotic technology, when all you really need is neutral lift.

If you have a platform that can achieve neutral lift at any altitude, with a sprinkle of thrusters for keeping position, you can hover silently as long as you like.

The main problem with any such platform is that it would be pretty poor with regards to maneuverability, but "zooming off" would most likely be something it would be capable of if you put some kind of thruster on the end of it. For any reasonable value of "zooming". It would probably be quite advanced and some cool tech, but hardly earth shattering.

The main problem with such LTA platforms is vulnerability, and if there is anything amazing about such a platform it would be how they expect it to survive. Now, this is where some pretty exotic and probably very secret technologies may fit into the picture, in my opinion.

This, however, has more to do with hiding and stealth, and not so much to do with propulsion and hovering.

originally posted by: mirageman

Photos were taken and sent into a newspaper and the RAF...

A few years back some intrepid ATSers were actually contacting the Scottish Daily Record about the pics..

Post

originally posted by: mirageman

It was decided that whole affair was of no defence significance and the case was closed.

'No defense significance' - interesting that the MOD broke with all official protocol when reporting and investigating the incident though.

Officials were so alarmed by the object, which was captured on camera, that they broke with established procedures and referred the sighting to ministers.

They also overrode rules prohibiting investigations into UFO sightings not considered an immediate threat to national security, and spent more than a year trying to crack the still unexplained mystery.


link

Apparently the material was rather 'sensitive'.

Even the creation of the drawings was shrouded in strict secrecy. One undated document suggests "very special handling" because of "sensitivity of the material". It also orders "minimum handling by listed personnel.

I believe this object was an American aircraft or drone, if it had been unknown aircraft in UK airspace it would of had tornados intercepting it, not a harrier and I suspect that aircraft would of been American and not RAF.
For the photo to have been on the office wall and then removed by popes boss after his boss thought it was an American secret aircraft says it all for me, and don't forget the yanks fly their secret stuff from RAF macrinhanish.

originally posted by: wobbs62

For the photo to have been on the office wall and then removed by popes boss after his boss thought it was an American secret aircraft says it all for me, and don't forget the yanks fly their secret stuff from RAF macrinhanish.

As Pope explained:

At some point in 1994 my Head of Division (a civilian, equivalent in rank to a One Star military officer and long-since retired) had somehow convinced himself that the craft was a secret, prototype aircraft or drone – probably American. But in response to repeated sightings of triangular-shaped UFOs capable of hovering and then accelerating away rapidly at high-Mach speeds, we’d just received assurances from the appropriate US authorities that the US wasn’t testing anything like this over the UK.

On the basis of these assurances, Defence Ministers had assured Parliament that no such aircraft/drones were being flown - so perhaps my Head of Division thought this was a lie and thought he was being loyal when one day he took the photo away and locked it in his desk drawer. On the other hand, he was probably the one who drafted the Parliamentary assurances, so maybe he was just covering his back.

Pope said he first saw the blown-up photo when he joined the so-called 'UFO Desk' in 1991, so it was on display for at least THREE years before being taken down, during which time - according to Pope - people were regularly popping by, mouths agape when they saw it.

I don't wanna bash the Pope, so to speak, but THREE years and only Pope himself has ever come forward to confirm it was on display? Is that feasible? Or is the "Poster On The Office Wall" a fictional element of the story that Pope has repeated so many times to the point of confabulation that he believes it himself?

a reply to: ConfusedBrit

The Pope likes to big up his role as Director of SHADO or Head of the UFO Project in the UK as we know. I don't know of anyone else however who has mentioned seeing it on his wall when he headed up his two man team.

The picture and negatives were subject to questions in Parliament in 1996



See : Parliamentary Record UK (Hansard)

The usual party line was given of being of no defence significance and that they had no records of any photographs "being taken from them".

A number of negatives associated with the sighting were examined by staff responsible for air defence matters. Since it was judged that they contained nothing of defence significance the negatives were not retained and we have no record of any photographs having been taken from them.

Which probably leads to an explanation which was readily known by someone, somewhere in Whitehall who had never seen Nick Pope's wall poster.

originally posted by: mirageman
a reply to: ConfusedBrit

The Pope likes to big up his role as Director of SHADO or Head of the UFO Project in the UK as we know.

Or a junior manager (Executive Officer with two Admin Officers) of a Civil Service desk in an office probably not much bigger then Fox 'Spooky' Mulder's - which also sported a blown-up photo of a UFO on a wall, of course. The previous occupier had apparently already displayed it when Pope took over in 1991, and 'The X-Files' was first transmitted in the UK on September 19th, 1994.

Pope moved on from the 'UFO desk' in 1994 - can we assume AFTER Sept 19th if he claims to have attracted the nickname 'Spooky'? The window of opportunity for that nickname was pretty small, wasn't it?

If I've learnt anything from this case, if I were to photograph any strange object (providing I'd have the time) I'd snap a few pics of the object then swap memory cards and take a few more pictures. Then I'd bury or hide the first memory card somewhere that I could easily go back to in a few days or weeks. If the authorities then confiscate my camera and memory card I know I could go back to the buried one and retrieve the evidence. I'm willing to do time for leaking pics lol

It will be okay Peace, I will bring you doughnuts while you are in lock up.

a reply to: ConfusedBrit

You never know with his holiness the pope, but this is one story I believe, although not that it was on display for three years, was probably on wall for a few days or weeks before being removed.
I still believe this was something the yanks were testing over Scotland.