It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Smoking (Anti-Aircraft) Guns (of Los Angeles, 1942)

page: 10
89
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 16 2009 @ 07:22 PM
link   
Composite Images Continued...

Site 2 - Ground Level



Please note that the Mountain Range in Question is depicted on the Right Side of all composite images...

Please note, you may need to click on the Image to open it in it's own window, in order to view the entire image...




posted on Feb, 16 2009 @ 07:30 PM
link   
Composite Images Concluded...

Site 3 - Ground Level


Site 3 - 2nd Floor Level



Please note that the Mountain Range in Question is depicted on the Right Side of all composite images...

Please note, you may need to click on the Image to open it in it's own window, in order to view the entire image...



In my next post, later on this evening, I plan to Isolate the area of the mountain range specifically for all viewers, and post a comparison photo with a mirror image of the original LA Times Photo. Please note, the angle of my picture is slightly different than the original, and the area has 'grown up' in the time elapsed since 1942...

Following that post, I will add the newly updated 'Master Map', and outline the Math to be done.

I look forward to comments in the interim


-WFA

p.s. Damn it's good to be back



posted on Feb, 16 2009 @ 07:52 PM
link   
Okay, here you have a mirror image comparison, with the Original from 1942 in between two images from today.



At this point, I feel I have the approximate location (close enough to do the Math) of the Photographer.

After I post the new Master Map later this evening, I'll dive into the Math next.


-WFA



posted on Feb, 16 2009 @ 08:27 PM
link   
Alright, here is the new Master Map, or the important portion of it anyway...



Here you can see the Photographer's Location plotted, and an approximation of the field of view of the Camera.

I'm going to build a list of variables, and values.
If anyone has any comments or advice, I'm all ears


-WFA



posted on Feb, 16 2009 @ 08:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by NephraTari
They fired at a solid object with LIVE rounds for a long time without doing it any damage whatsoever and the craft did not return fire but just left casually when it wanted to.


Really? Where do you get the idea it was solid? Do we have pieces of it? Not that I know of. We got a lot of AA shrapnel, sure. But nobody knows if it was any more substantial than a thick cloud.



posted on Feb, 16 2009 @ 09:36 PM
link   
reply to post by Nohup
 


That's not entirely true Nohup. There is data that proves the target was solid. Radar doesn't bounce off of air...

I'm sorry to be rude, but you ARE aware of the multiple radar returns from the craft. It is intellectually dishonest to phrase your question to NephraTiri as if you were unaware of these facts.

The United States Army documented those radar returns. This clearly indicates solidity...

-WFA


p.s. Nohup, it's been too long old friend. I've missed you



posted on Feb, 17 2009 @ 05:44 PM
link   
Just a quick update, I'll do my best to attend the Re-enactment of the event this year.

Thanks to the Anonymous Poster who supplied the Flyer! I just saw it now while re-reading the thread.

I'll bring my camera & audio recording equipment for documentation purposes. Hopefully there will be some experts there who will be able to tell us more about the equipment involved in the battle. I'm counting on there being searchlights there as well. I'll try to document that activity if it happens.

I'll be dressed like I am in my Avatar, if any ATS member would like an in person chat about the event. (no mask, of course...)

I'll wear a Superman Sock Hat to make it easy to spot me in the crowd.
Hope to see any ATS members from the LA Area there!

-WFA



posted on Feb, 18 2009 @ 03:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by WitnessFromAfar
Just a quick update, I'll do my best to attend the Re-enactment of the event this year.


I'll bring my camera & audio recording equipment for documentation purposes. Hopefully there will be some experts there who will be able to tell us more about the equipment involved in the battle. I'm counting on there being searchlights there as well. I'll try to document that activity if it happens.

-WFA


Don't forget to mention your thread to these experts in case they would care to have a read and/or contribute. The information here ay trigger some memory or further info and they may be able to point out things that none of us have seen or been aware of.

Grea work WAF.. keep going mate. Wish i could attend.. but alas, there's a big pond between us....



posted on Feb, 19 2009 @ 03:00 AM
link   
Hello

I arrive at about the same result.





Scott Littleton writes:

I was an eye-witness to the events of that unforgettable February
morning in February of 1942. I was eight-years-old at the time, and my
parents lived at 2500 Strand in Hermosa Beach, right on the beach. We thus
had a grandstand seat. While my father went about his air-raid warden
duties, my late mother and I watched the glowing object, which was caught in
the glare of searchlights from both Palos Verdes and
Malibu/Pacific/Palisades and surrounded by the puffs of ineffectual
anti-aircraft fire, as it slowly flew across the ocean from northwest to
southeast. It headed inland over Redondo Beach, a couple of miles to the
south of our vantage point, and eventually disappeared over the eastern end
of the Palos Verdes hills, what's today called Rancho Palos Verdes. The
whole incident last, at least from our perspective, lasted about half an
hour, though we didn't time it.

it was very well placed to give us the exact position of the Antiaircraft and the direction of the UFO



posted on Feb, 19 2009 @ 03:53 AM
link   


Effective Beam length: 5.6 miles
www.ftmac.org...
beam 5.6 miles
Hypotenuse = 5.60 miles

height 1.00
Side 5.51
Hypotenuse 5.60

we can start working

[edit on 19//2/0909 by Plusthon]



posted on Feb, 23 2009 @ 03:58 PM
link   
sorry link not working




posted on Feb, 28 2009 @ 02:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Plusthon
 


Hi there Plusthon, nice to meet you. I appreciate your enthusiasm, and I'll be joining the discussion in appropriate formula at some point this week.

Hello to everyone else, on this day of the 2009 Re-Enactment of the Battle of Los Angeles!!! (I'm so excited)

I'll be out at Fort MacArthur today, for at least a few hours, SuperMan Sock hat and all


Hope to see any LA ATS Members there!

-WFA



posted on Feb, 28 2009 @ 02:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Extralien
 


I'm going to U2U you my personal Email. I'll check it from my phone while I'm there. If you'd like me to document anything while there, let me know


-WFA



posted on Feb, 28 2009 @ 03:58 PM
link   
photo newspapers exposed in the Fort MacArthur






posted on Feb, 28 2009 @ 04:02 PM
link   









posted on Mar, 1 2009 @ 07:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by WitnessFromAfar




So the object at 0200 is located 120 miles west of L.A.





Clip 3:







At 0226-0227 it is within 3 miles of L.A.







Clip 5:

The target in question is the one from clips 2 and 3 of this post, and is the likely object photographed by the LA Times. The object is tracked on radar for 21 minutes, until it is within 3 miles of Los Angeles at 0227.











117 miles in 27 minutes = 4.3 miles per minute or 260 mph.



Carry on.











[edit on 1-3-2009 by undermind]



posted on Mar, 2 2009 @ 08:28 AM
link   
reply to post by undermind
 

the problem is that the speed corresponding to the speed of Japanese planes (if there have been, which was demant)








www.ww2f.com...



posted on Mar, 2 2009 @ 08:59 AM
link   
Santa Barbara's Ellwood
Oil Field Submarine Attack


Ellwood Oil Field


< br />



The LA Times:


"From Santa Barbara, area of the submarine attack Monday night, District Attorney Percy Heckendorf said he would appeal to Lt. Gen. John L. DeWitt, commanding officer of the Western Defense Command, to make Santa Barbara County a restricted area for enemy nationals and American-born Japanese as well. "There is convincing proof," Heckendorf asserted, "that there were shore signals flashed to the enemy." Heckendorf said the people will hold Gen. DeWitt responsible if he failed to act. Army ordinance officers, meanwhile, were studying more than 200 pounds of shell fragments from missiles fired by the submarine, which caused only $500 damage in the Ellwood oil field near Santa Barbara."

It is said by some locals that the skipper or one of the officers on the Japanese sub had worked in the Ellwood oil field some years prior to the outbreak of the war. The story claims that the man had been mistreated by some of his co-workers during that time, had returned to Japan before the war began, and had then subsequently helped lead the submarine back to the area to make it's attack.



posted on Mar, 2 2009 @ 01:37 PM
link   
reply to post by undermind
 


I came out with a different figure, in this post:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

I think it's closer to 334mph.

Please reference the linked post and the posts above and below it, and let me know if I've missed something.

Welcome to the case Undermind! Great to see you here with us!

-WFA



posted on Mar, 2 2009 @ 01:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Plusthon
 


Plusthon, I would agree with your sentiment, please see this post:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Wherein I examined the American and Japanese Planes in existence at the time, and measured the data against the observed evidence in this case.

None of the aircraft around back then could do what this object did, for certain.
I'd love to hear your feedback on the link above...

-WFA



new topics

top topics



 
89
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join