It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
This is Capt. Ruppelt speaking. I have been listening in on another extension. Just from the sound of this thing, we've had quite a few pictures like that before and it doesn't sound to me like it is very authentic... The fact that nobody else saw this thing is always quite a factor... We have some experience with that type of picture, and from the description that you gave I would say that it is doubtful... We sure do thank you for calling because that's the kind of things that we want to look into.... Mr. Dixon, if it is possible that this man would release these negatives, we would be very glad to take it and evaluate and send it back to you...
The relative sizes of the objects in the foreground indicate that the object would be about the size of a lady's sun hat at 30 ft. to 40 ft. away. If the object were farther away, it would be extremely large and again it should have been observed by other people.
Object estimated by Stock never to exceed speed of over fifteen miles per hour. Object developed vapor-like ring around outer edge just prior to starting off in northerly direction. Ring appeared to travel with object. George Stock furnished five negatives and seven pictures of object for technical observation. Two negatives and pictures when investigation completed.
Search of Stock residence did not reveal equipment of object capable of producing or resembling object. Sketch of object as described by Stock included with this report... Object does not resemble type of street light or play-ground light globes used by electric and playground departments in this area.
hovered again, turned up on its edge and at about a forty-give degree angle turned a complete 360 degree turn, using the lower end of the angle as its axis "as though to give its dome a clear view of what was below"... just prior to its change of direction to the north and just prior to its start of the its forward motion, the object developed what Stock thought to be a vapor ring around its entire outer edge. He said that this ring became more dense as the object got further away and picked up speed. He could not judge how dense or how thick the vapor ring was...
The surfaces appeared clean without rivets or seams... the dome and saucer part of the body appeared to be one piece... the object was between sixty and eighty feet in diameter and eight feet high from the saucer-like bottom to top of its dome... the vapor-like ring did not trail off in smoke fashion after the object started off to the north, however, the ring seemed to go along with the object without changing the vapor ring's shape.
"The Government knows all about them so why should we get excited".
Dixon said he saw something like a fishing pole, and I looked at all the photos in your links, and I'm not seeing a pole
originally posted by: Arbitrageur
Dixon said he saw something like a fishing pole, and I looked at all the photos in your links, and I'm not seeing a pole, so I wonder if it has been cropped out of the pictures shown?
It depends. In some UFO photography, where the camera is centered on the object, people sometimes complain if all you can see is an object in the sky with no context of any objects on the ground. So if I photographed a real UFO I might try to include some ground features also to provide some context. However in this case I think the context suggests the UFO is relatively close to the camera due to the high contrast of the UFO, compared to the lower contrast of the ground objects like trees, especially in this image from the OP:
originally posted by: Dr UAE
a reply to: Arbitrageur
if i had a camera and saw an object like this i would keep it in the middle of the photo, wouldn't you ?
The Trent UFO has a shape very similar to a canning pot lid, as an ATS poster pointed out in a thread on that UFO. I'm not sure what is seen in the Stock photos this thread is about, except it doesn't look like the same canning pot lid. It could be another object relatively close to the camera though, as suggested by the high contrast of the UFO.
originally posted by: Blaine91555
Sorry, forgot to mention the link is to the Trent photo's.
It depends. In some UFO photography, where the camera is centered on the object, people sometimes complain if all you can see is an object in the sky with no context of any objects on the ground. So if I photographed a real UFO I might try to include some ground features also to provide some context. However in this case I think the context suggests the UFO is relatively close to the camera due to the high contrast of the UFO, compared to the lower contrast of the ground objects like trees
originally posted by: Blue Shift
Photographer sure jumped around a lot. I don't see any two photos with similar backgrounds that I could use to make a stereo image and maybe get a bead on how big and far away it was.
originally posted by: ConfusedBrit
Despite the questions posed by the case, learning how Blue Book investigated what they blindly believed to be a hoax at the first instant, is interesting in itself, including the FBI performing thorough background checks on the three men with no stone left unturned, it seems.
Good suggestion. It didn't ring any bells for me at first so I did an image search, and found plenty of domed chimney caps but usually the dome took up most or all the diameter, and wasn't half the diameter or less like in the photos (The photographer estimated the dome was about 1/3 the diameter I think). I was about to give up when I got to page 25 and saw these, which do have a similar shape, and things may have changed since the 1950s:
originally posted by: Blaine91555
a reply to: Arbitrageur
They look like a chimney roof cap for the vent from a heater to me and I think that's likely what the domed one is.
If the person who examined the negatives was correct, he thought he saw a fishing pole and possibly some line holding the object up though thin transparent fishing line would be very hard to photograph. So if held up by a fishing pole/line, no need to toss it.
Have someone toss it like a Frisbee, maybe from a roof and snap a photo.