The Smoking (Anti-Aircraft) Guns (of Los Angeles, 1942), page 2
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4    5  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 87 times


reply posted on 25-1-2008 @ 01:54 AM by Timmyboi23
Here is the actual account of a LA Air Warden from the timw

www.rense.com...

Interesting read.

www.damninteresting.com...

The Air Raid Warden says that the planes fired on the ship. The other article says the AF said they were only on alert. Reminds me of what happened the other day in Texas

sorry about the double post

[edit on 25-1-2008 by Timmyboi23]


reply posted on 25-1-2008 @ 03:26 AM by neformore
How much info? Great bit of research!

I actually believe that something was in the sky over LA that night, but as to exactly what it was I'm not sure. I can - and will - offer a few opinions in a minute.

Firstly though, I have to start on a difficult note. The photograph that appears so many times in your info - its not the actual image is it? By that I mean, its not the original genuine photo. Even if it was you would need to do a full proper analysis on the negative and not on the photo itself. Digitial enhancements of scanned black and white newspaper photo's can't really prove anything I'm afraid Without wading through the books on the subject - something I'm convinced you have done - I have no idea if an analysis of the negatives was done. Was that the case?

From a purely visual POV, what I personally see is beam convergence, with a bright flak flash at the top that just happens to make it look like the dome on a UFO. But I'll qualify that with the fact that I can't say that for sure and its open to individual interpretations, and if the negative was analysed and shows something different then fair enough.

Back to my opinions...

The Japanese had some interesting projects in WW2.

Crazy, but this is true - one was the idea that they could introduce bubonic plague and other nasties to the US by floating carrier rats across the Pacific on balloons.

The other was the use of aircraft, launched from submarines - yes submarines - to start huge forest fires by dropping incendiaries on dry woodland. Several raids were mounted although none proved particularly successful

Its possible that the battle was sparked by a baloon cluster, or by a sub launched plane, and fuelled by national pride, and reflection off low lying cloud. Possible mind, not definite.

So, I am most certainly not debunking this subject Witness, far from it. I'm looking for more information than I've got time to read up on right now. I've read about the battle itself but never took the time to get into the full detail and you have so please, could you let me know how the points I've raised above have been addressed?



reply posted on 25-1-2008 @ 12:32 PM by LazyGuy
The 3 inch AA gun seems to be a close match to the info given about the shells being used. They said 12.8 LB, but my search for that only seemed to have turned up pages talking about the Battle of LA. They may have meant 12.5 LB.

Source

The 3 inch Anti-Aircraft dates back to the First World War and was still in service at the beginning of the Second World War. While the 3.7" was superior in performance to the 3" anti-aircraft gun the 3.7" was not yet available in sufficient numbers and the 3" was much lighter which meant it had greater mobility, it also had a high rate of fire and a good transverse speed. Production of the guns had ceased in Britain well before the war but a number were still undergoing conversion and mobile platforms were still being built at the beginning of the war. It's interesting to note that some guns were still being built in India up until 1943.

3" Anti-Aircraft Gun Data
Weight of gun and breech 2,250lb
Total length 140"
Length of bore 45 cal
Rifling 20 grooves, 1/30
Elevation -10, +90 degrees
Traverse 360 degrees
Weight in Action 6,000lb
Rate of fire 20-25
Projectile weight 16.5lb/12.5lb
Muzzle velocity 2,000/2,500fps
Max horizontal range 12,400/10,900 yards
Max Ceiling 15,700/23,500 feet


The 37th Coast Artillery Brigade was based in Camp Haan, Riverside.
Source


reply posted on 25-1-2008 @ 01:47 PM by WitnessFromAfar
reply to post by Timmyboi23



WOW! There is a lot to respond to in this thread today, I'll do my best

Let's start with Timmyboi's question. Yes, you can get original copies of most if not all of these newspapers.

The site: www.newspaperarchive.com...
Is where I found the digital representation of most. It costs money, but you can get a week pass and get all your research done in that week.

For actual printed papers you would need to go to each source itself, and order a reprint. These can get pricey. I'm really at the point where I've simply collected a database of the articles that reference the event. Anyone willing to spend the $ to get the original articles would be a huge help in this investigation. I simply cannot afford to do so now, and will try to in the future if nobody has done it by the time I can afford it

Also, I'm pretty sure it would violate copyright laws to publish a transcript of an original article here (although it would help a lot!) But summaries are good, and you can always post relevent text with proper sourcing.

I hope that answers your question Tim Thanks for participating!


reply posted on 25-1-2008 @ 02:10 PM by WitnessFromAfar
Hi Neformore! Before I begin to address your post, I just have to say that I was reading the 'Are ETs That Stupid?' thread just yesterday. You have a truly amazing mind, and I'm honored that you would turn it to this issue.
I hope others from that thread, like Ecoterrestrial and Tayga jump in here too. Intelligent analysis is the only way were going to get to the bottom of this event, and the more folks interested in such analysis the better. Welcome! On to your questions...

Originally posted by neformore
Firstly though, I have to start on a difficult note. The photograph that appears so many times in your info - its not the actual image is it? By that I mean, its not the original genuine photo. Even if it was you would need to do a full proper analysis on the negative and not on the photo itself. Digitial enhancements of scanned black and white newspaper photo's can't really prove anything I'm afraid Without wading through the books on the subject - something I'm convinced you have done - I have no idea if an analysis of the negatives was done. Was that the case?


It's a difficult note indeed. To be perfectly honest with you, I'm not certain what images were used for what enhancements by different analysts. That's one of the main reasons I wanted to compile all of this data, is to perhaps glean the answers to that question.

There are two images that are claimed to be the 'Original', and two more that claim to be 'the original negative'. Each has subtle differences, and without the LA Times commenting, I'm not sure how to determine what is the original and what isn't. I've written to the LA Times, but have not yet received a response.

I can say that MY analysis (not image analysis mind you, but analysis of the image in an attempt to ascertain the photographer's location) deals with the image itself, and not the negative. I used the first picture listed in the Images section of the report, since it's the largest and seems to contain the highest resolution. I put the photo in MS Paint, and reduced it's size by 50%, so that it would fit well in a post here at ATS. I simply added the red lines you see to help bring out certain features like the searchlights and mountains. I fully believe we can find the location of the photographer using clues from the image itself. That's as far as my personal image analysis has gone thus far. I would LOVE it if Bruce Maccabee and Frank Warren (Frank is a member here) would weigh in on their image analysis. Bruce's site contains information on what he did to the pics too.

Originally posted by neformore
From a purely visual POV, what I personally see is beam convergence, with a bright flak flash at the top that just happens to make it look like the dome on a UFO. But I'll qualify that with the fact that I can't say that for sure and its open to individual interpretations, and if the negative was analysed and shows something different then fair enough.


I would agree that it's difficult to determine what is in the picture. The work on the image in Bruce Maccabee's analysis seems to show an object in the beams, with defined edges.

What makes me think that there is something there, is the fact that the AA shells are exploding against something, and not simply travelling on to complete their arc of momentum and falling to ground at a distance. If there wasn't anything in the sky to impact against, physics tells us those shells would keep on travelling.

That's just my take, and I'm certainly willing to examine evidence to the contrary


Originally posted by neformore
Back to my opinions...
The Japanese had some interesting projects in WW2.

Crazy, but this is true - one was the idea that they could introduce bubonic plague and other nasties to the US by floating carrier rats across the Pacific on balloons.

The other was the use of aircraft, launched from submarines - yes submarines - to start huge forest fires by dropping incendiaries on dry woodland. Several raids were mounted although none proved particularly successful

Its possible that the battle was sparked by a baloon cluster, or by a sub launched plane, and fuelled by national pride, and reflection off low lying cloud. Possible mind, not definite.


I agree it's a possibility. I've considered it too. Nohup has a similar theory, and to be perfectly honest I'm not certain yet and feel more analysis should be done.

The problem I keep coming back to with the 'balloon cluster' and 'sub launched plane' theories, is that we couldn't shoot this object down. That's after over an hour of shelling, and over 1400 shells. YES, absolutely the japanese balloons and sub-launched planes existed at the time, but neither could hover (the planes were gliders and the balloons would be influenced by the wind) and neither could take that kind of punishment from our AA gunners.

Also, for reference, I have a great respect for Japanese ingenuity. Their ideas were really quite inspired. Forest Fires are one of the top threats to California today.

Originally posted by neformore
So, I am most certainly not debunking this subject Witness, far from it. I'm looking for more information than I've got time to read up on right now. I've read about the battle itself but never took the time to get into the full detail and you have so please, could you let me know how the points I've raised above have been addressed?


Hope I've been able to help. I'll be honest though Neformore, I'm still investigating too! I'm certain though that if people like you and I keep digging into this, we'll at the very least be able to make a solid comprehensive list of what it WASN'T! Thank you indeed for bringing these points up. I look forward to reading and thinking about your arguments in the future, both on this thread and others.


reply posted on 25-1-2008 @ 02:31 PM by WitnessFromAfar
reply to post by LazyGuy



Amazing work LazyGuy, you're not so lazy after all
Thanks for tracking this down. We now know one location for one of the AA Batteries, Riverside, CA. I'll be looking into this further (as I hope you do too!) to try to pinpoint the exact location of the Riverside Battery, so that we can plot it on a map with the other batteries (once they are located, of course). This information is a part of American History, UFO or not, and should be on the record. It just takes a bit of work to find it. I'm glad you are helping LazyGuy, keep up the great work!

Here is a map showing Riverside in reference to the rest of Los Angeles and the Santa Monica Coastline, for reference:


Riverside is to the right of the image (not shown in ATS size cropping), please click on the map for the full image with Riverside listed.

Thanks everyone for your thoughts and ideas! Let's keep this ball rolling!



reply posted on 25-1-2008 @ 02:35 PM by WitnessFromAfar
reply to post by Phil J. Fry



You are very welcome Phil J. Fry. I've read many of your posts in other threads, and am very pleased to have you examining this data. I'm anxious to hear your thoughts, but I know it's a lot of info to dig through.

There are still so many pieces of info to acquire, I feel we're still a long way from real answers, but with folks like you weighing in on this issue, we're bound to get our answers


reply posted on 25-1-2008 @ 02:41 PM by Extralien
here's a bofors gun of the time.

strangecorridor.blogspot.com...

And a searchlight.

www.geocities.com...

Anti-Aircraft Defenses, fixed and flexible mounts

www.ftmac.org...

Abandoned & Little-Known Airfields:

California - Central Los Angeles Area

contains some small maps of the areas in question
www.airfields-freeman.com...


Harbor Defenses of Los Angeles
www.militarymuseum.org...



[edit on 25-1-2008 by Extralien]
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4    5  >>    ^^TOP^^



Life Spotted on Venus - Russian Scientist
  Posted 17 days ago with 100 member flags
Moon: inexplicable phenomena. Luna Cognita video.
  Posted 12 days ago with 60 member flags
Aliens Among Us ...Video
  Posted 3 days ago with 58 member flags
New UFO footage from my hometown
  Posted 16 days ago with 34 member flags
UFOs \'Escort\' Mexican Aircraft - Radar Confirmed.
  Posted 6 days ago with 30 member flags
The Dyatlov Pass Incident--Russia\'s Mountain of Death
  Posted 13 days ago with 28 member flags