It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


The Lakenheath-Bentwaters UFO Incident

page: 1
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

+47 more 
posted on Jul, 6 2009 @ 12:57 PM
Hynek Classification: CE1/RV

Image courtesy of
The Lakenheath, England UFO Incident is one of the best cases in ufology, it has multiple radar contacts as well visual reports. In the late night and early morning hours of August 13th and 14th, 1956 something extraordinary happened in the skies over southeastern England. It is also interesting because Lakenheath AFB was also a US nuclear bomber base. This incident is best described by the four separate events that occurred over a time span of 5 hours and had the object traveling at speeds between 80 mph and up to 10,800 mph potentially. A British fighter jet, the de Havilland DH.112 Venom , was subsequently launched to intercept this unknown aircraft, with another launched after the first pilot called for assistance. The ensuing chase, which at times had the UFO right behind the jets' tail left the pilot shaken and the British and American investigators scrambling for answers to what the Venoms were chasing that night.

Picture of actual officer drawings on the radar panel courtesy of the Lakenheath Collaboration

I need to note that this case is very poorly put together by researchers thus far, with information all over the place, some information non-existent anymore, conflicting reports, and the certain names of individuals present, especially the pilots is questionable as sources are scarce with this information. There is conflicting reports from the British side and the USAF Blue Books side of the story. This case has also recently been heavily investigated by a collaborative British research team known as the Lakenheath Collaboration.The only thing known for sure is that there were multiple radar hits from multiple stations of unknown objects traveling at extreme speeds, ground visuals, a C-47 that got a close visual, as well a British fighter jet that did get a radar and visual lock on one of the objects. This case,despite the poorly ordered information is still one of the best and hardest to explain cases in ufology. Many people do not know of this case and they should in my opinion.

Also let me say that I intentionally have not covered the Washington D.C. sightings of July,1952(as many know I am covering three of the top cases of each decade starting with the 40's). I did not cover these because the case has already been extensively covered here on ATS. You can find good information about the case here at NICAP and on this thread by ATS member Gazrok.

Chapter Summary
1. The Radar Contacts
2. The Chase
3. Alternate Explanations and Official Conclusions
4. My Conclusions


1.The Radar Contacts

Important Information

The Players: British and American military personal that I could find...

  • Flight Lieutenant Freddie Wimbledon: Supervisor at Neatishead RAF Fighter Command that night, responsible for sending the intercept orders.

  • Lakenheath air traffic supervisor, USAF officer, Sgt. Forrest Perkins

  • Lakenheath air traffic controller S.Stg. Thomas Emerick

  • Lakenheath assistant air traffic controller A/3C James M. Kastner

  • Intelligence Specialist A/1C Ronald R Erikson

  • Intelligence Specialist A/2C Richard T. Lynch

  • Intelligence Specialist A/2C Gene O. Godfrey

  • Intelligence Specialist A/2C Philip R. Fowler

  • Pilot of Venom One: Dave Chambers

  • Pilot of Venom Two: Ian Frazer-Kerr

  • Navigator of Venom One: John Brady

  • Navigator of Venom Two: Ivan Logan

  • It should be noted that there were many reported civilian witness reports that night but none have been able to be confirmed as true.

    The Places: Lakenworth(US nuclear bomber base) and Bentwaters Air Force bases in England, which in 1956 were on loan to the United States by the Royal Air Force. Radar contact was made from three separate sources(Lakenheath, Bentwaters, and Venom aircraft) with multiple radar configurations.

  • Bentwaters AFB
    - Radar stations: GCA (Ground Control Approach), AN/MPN-1,1 A

  • Lakenheath AFB
    -Radar stations: RATCC(Radar Air Traffic Control Center), CPS-4, CPS-5

  • Venom aircraft with AI (Aircraft Interceptor) radar

  • There were times when there was both an aircraft hit AND a ground hit. Also there were times when there was a visual conformation AND radar conformation.

  • It is also important to note that all original time is Greenwich Mean Time ZULU (zero). I have translated the 24 hour numbers into the more commonly civilian use of 12 hour numbers for ease of understanding.

    The Types of Radar Available At Time of Incident:

  • TS-ID
  • CPS-5
  • CPN-4
  • MTI
  • Aircraft radar was AI, or "Aircraft Interceptor"

    Helpful radar link: Radar

    This is detailed about the various types: Radar Types

    Weather Conditions

    Clear sky until 3AM, with an unlimited ceiling. Visibility between 1:00AM and 4:00AM was 10 nautical miles with no storm systems in the region. All aircraft were accounted for and identified by radar. Wind direction between 12:00AM and 6:00AM was as follows:
    -(Velocity in degrees) Surface:230 deg at 15 knots
    -6,000 feet: 290 deg at 24 knots
    -10,000 feet: 290 deg at 35 knots
    -16,000 feet: 290 deg at 45 knots
    -20,000 feet: 290 deg at 53 knots
    -30,000 feet: 290 deg at 62 knots
    -50,000 feet: 290 deg at 75 knots
    All weather, radar, personal, and location information courtesy of the Lakenheath Collaboration

    Detailed Contact Information

    First Contact
    The first URE, or unidentified radar echo, came at around 9:30 PM on the Bentwaters Air Force Base radar. The contact was about 25-30 miles east, southeast. The contact remained until it was lost about 15-20 miles to the west, northwest of Bentwaters. The object stayed on a constant azimuth heading of 285 degrees and was moving at an estimated speed of between 4,000 and 10,800 mph (Mach 7.5 - 15), the speed varies as there is discrepancy in the radar operators calculation of speed in regards to the transit time between distances in between the 2 second radar sweeps. The operator said that "the size of the blip was that of a normal aircraft, but diminished in size and intensity to the vanishing point before crossing the entire screen."A T-33 "Shooting Star" trainer from the 512th Fighter Interceptor Squadron manned by 1st Lieutenants Charles Metz and navigator Andrew Rowe, who were already in the air returning from a training mission, were diverted to investigate but found nothing and returned home.

    Second Contact
    About 5 minutes later at around 9:35PM a group of 12-15 UREs was picked up about 8 miles southwest of Bentwaters, the echos "appeared as normal targets" and "normal checks were made to determine possible malfunctions of the radar failed to show any malfunctions." The UFOs appeared to move as a group to the northeast at speeds varying between 80 and 125 mph. A 6-7 mile area was covered on the scope, while the echos "faded considerably" after a distance of 14 miles NE of Bentwaters they were still tracked to a point 40 miles NE of Bentwaters where they merged into a single echo "several times larger than a B-36 return under similar conditions." This single echo remained stationary for 10-15 minutes at this location 40 miles NE of Bentwaters for 10-15 minutes, then proceeded to move NE for 5-6 miles, stopped again for 3-5 minutes, and finally moved out of range (range was 50 miles) of the radar at 9:55PM. The apparent average speed for the merged object was calculated at between 290-700 mph (58 miles in 5-12 minutes).

    Image of reconstruction of a vintage radar room circa 1956 courtesy of

    Third Contact
    At 10:00PM yet another contact was picked up about 30 miles east of Bentwaters and tracked to a point about 25 miles west of the station for 16 seconds. The radar operator figured the speed to be "in excess of 4,000 mph" but given the distance covered divided by time it appears the speed was more like 12,000 mph, or around Mach 17. All of the returns appeared normal except for the last, which was slightly weaker than the others. The URE disappeared when it moved out of range.

    Map showing area of incident with Air Force bases represented by black circles and towns by black squares,courtesy of
    Continued Below....

  • posted on Jul, 6 2009 @ 12:57 PM
    Fourth Contact
    At 10:55PM radar contact occurred again, the URE was 30 miles east of Bentwaters moving west at an apparent speed of between 2,000-4,000 mph. The URE disappeared 2 miles East of the station and "immediately" appeared on scope 3 miles west of the station. It then disappeared entirely 30 miles west of the station. It is interesting to note that this URE appeared to be on the same course as the third contact and depending on the radar operators definition of "immediately" (as in blinked off and back on in the same sweep) then the speed would have been around 18,000 mph, or around Mach 25. The official Blue Book report estimated the speed lower, at 12,000 mph. Now at this point in this ongoing anomalous saga someone at Bentwaters called an operator at Lakenheath radar station and asked "if they had any 4,000 mph targets". The caller from Bentwaters also stated the control tower at Bentwaters had reported seeing a " bright light passing over the field from east to west at terrific speed at around 4,000 feet altitude." Now at this same time a pilot of a C-47 flying over the station at 4,000 feet reported "a bright light passed under his craft moving east to west at terrific speed."

    Accordingly the Lakenheath radar supervisor had all controllers start scanning the scopes using MTI, or a moving target indicator, which eliminated all ground clutter, or ground returns.The operators soon discovered a stationary echo about 20-25 miles southwest of Lakenheath. It is interesting to note that the radars should not have picked up the target because it was not moving, but they did. Here is an interesting note on why they may have still picked up a stationary target:

    A vibrating or rapidly rotating target will show up on MTI radar even if it is not otherwise in motion.

    It then began moving once again in an instantaneous acceleration in velocity to 400-600 mph in a north, northeast direction. Local Air Force command was notified and kept appraised of the developing situation, which included the URE making several linear direction changes at around 600 mph with no speed change apparent in the directional changes. The changes varied between 8 and 20 miles in length with stationary episodes of 180-360 seconds (3-6 minutes) in between. It is also note worthy that there were several observations at Lakenheath at this time, including multiple site radar AND visual conformations of the objects instant acceleration and abrupt stops. At about 11:50PM the RAF (Royal Air Force) scrambled a de Havilland "Venom" fighter jet to investigate.

    Helpful Link
    Gordon Thayer NICAP Report

    2.The Chase

    Image of Venom jet fighter courtesy of

    The case here differs in the British version and American (Blue Book) version in a few parts. The first difference is the location of where the jet took off from and where contact was made with the UFO. According to British reports the jet was launched from a field near London, which is 30-45 miles southwest, while the USAF report states the jet was launched from Waterbeach RAF station, which is only 20 miles southwest of Lakenheath. The second difference is the fact that the radar control supervisor at Lakenheath stated that the Venom was vectored to the stationary UFO (the fifth contact) at about 16 miles SW of Lakenheath and that was the only contact with the UFO. Now according to Blue Book "the jet flew over Lakenheath and was vectored to a radar target 6 miles east of the field. The pilot then advised he had a bright, white light in sight and would investigate. At 13 miles west of Lakenheath he reported loss of the target and light." This statement implies that the pilot had both a radar lock and visual sight on the UFO. "Lakenheath then vectored him to another target 10 miles east, the pilot advised target was in sight and he was locking on." Now in the timeline of things this new target would be classified as the "fifth contact", this one occurred both on the ground and in the air however. The watch supervisor at Lakenheath does agree with this fifth hit, except for the distance from the base. After these discrepancies everything else matches in both Blue Book and British accounts.

    Chart courtesy of

    The stationary UFO was at an altitude 15-20,000 feet and about 16 miles SW of the base. Shortly after the new vector was given Lakenworth told the pilot the URE was half a mile dead ahead, the pilot then radioed, "Roger...I've got my guns on him." The pilot was referring to a radar fire control system, the pilot told the USAF later that the "URE was the clearest target I've ever seen on radar." There was a brief pause after the pilot radioed the lock, then the pilot radioed Lakenworth asking "Where did he go?", "Do you still have him?". Lakenheath then radioed in saying the UFO had made a swift circular movement and was now BEHIND the aircraft! The pilot then confirmed the UFO was indeed behind him and that he would "try to shake it". The pilots numerous maneuvers to shake the unknown aircraft were unsuccessful, Lakenheath said that there was a distinct radar echo behind the echo of the jet, indicating that the separation was greater than 500 feet. At this time, still unable to shake the UFO of his tail the Venom pilot requested assistance. After around ten minutes the first pilot radioed in, reportedly sounding very scared, saying he was returning to base because his fuel was low. He asked if the craft was following him and was told by Lakenheath that it did for a short distance then resumed its stationary position.

    "He tried everything. He climbed, dived and circled. But the UFO acted like it was glued right behind him. Always the same same distance, very close."
    For 10 minutes the pilot tried to shake off the object. Those on the ground could "tell from his tonal quality that he was getting worried, excited and also pretty scared."
    Soon after he turned back to base as fuel was getting low.

    Lakenheath Collaboration

    The second Venom was directed towards the last position of the UFO but before he got close enough to the object he reported engine malfunctions and stated he was returning to base. The following is the pilot to pilot conversation monitored by the radar control:

    Number 2: "Did you see anything? "
    Number 1: "I saw something, but I'll be damned if I know what it was."
    Number 2: "What happened?"
    Number 1: "He - or it - got behind me and I did everything I could to get behind him and I couldn't. It's the damnedest thing I've ever seen."

    Here is the information taken by Blue Book personal regarding the Venom-UFO encounter:

    d) [Description of flight path and maneuvers of object(s)] Flight path was straight but jerky with object stopping instantly and then continuing. Maneuvers were of the same pattern except one object was observed to "lock on" to fighter scrambled by RAF and followed all maneuvers of the jet fighter aircraft. In addition, Lakenheath RATCC observed object 17 miles east of station making sharp rectangular course of flight. This maneuver was not conducted by circular path but on right angles at speeds 600-800 mph. Object would stop and start with amazing rapidity.

    Lakenheath Collaboration

    The pilot of Venom one said he did have a radar gun lock for several seconds so "there was something there that was solid." Following the chase the UFO did not immediately leave the radar scope, according to the night supervisor:

    The target made a couple more short moves, then left our radar coverage in a northerly direction -- speed still about 600 mph. We lost target outbound to the north at about 50-60 mi., which is normal if aircraft or target is at an altitude below 5,000 ft (because of the radiation lobe of that type radar [a CPS-5]).

    The time of the loss of contact was given by Blue Book at around 3:30AM. It is important to note that the radar supervisor stated "The speeds that night were all calculated based on the time and distance covered on radar." Additionally he said, "This speed was calculated many times that evening."
    Continued Below....

    posted on Jul, 6 2009 @ 12:57 PM
    Here is a statement from Flight Lieutenant Freddie Wimbledon,supervisor at Neatishead RAF Fighter Command that night, responsible for sending the intercept orders:

    I was Chief Controller on duty at the main RAF Radar Station in East Anglia on the night in question. My duties were to monitor the radar picture and to scramble the Battle Flight, who were on duty 24 hours a day, to intercept any intruder of British airspace not positively identified in my sector of responsibility."
    "I remember Lakenheath USAF base telephoning to say there was some thing "buzzing" their airfield circuit. I scrambled a Venom night fighter from the Battle Flight through Sector and my controller in the Interception Cabin took over control of it. The Interception Control team would consist of one Fighter Controller (an Officer), a Corporal, a tracker and a height reader. That is, four highly trained personnel in addition to myself could now clearly see the object on our radarscopes."
    "After being vectored onto the trail of the object by my Interception Controller, the pilot called out, "Contact," then a short time later, "Judy," which meant the Navigator had the target fairly and squarely on his own radar screen and needed no further help from the ground. He continued to close on the target but after a few seconds, and in the space of one or two sweeps of our scopes, the object appeared behind our fighter.
    Our pilot called out, "Lost Contact, more help," and he was told the target was now behind him and he was given fresh instructions."
    "I then scrambled a second Venom which was vectored toward the area but before it arrived on the scene the target had disappeared from our scopes and although we continued to keep a careful watch was not seen by us."
    "The fact remains that at least nine RAF ground personnel and two RAF aircrew were conscious of an object sufficiently "solid" to give returns on radar. Naturally, all this was reported and a Senior Officer from the Air Ministry came down and interrogated us

    Timeline of Events and Quick Summary

    [color=gold] -9:30PM: Radar contact made by Bentwaters GCA, AN/MPN-1. Contact made 25-30 mile east, southeast of base at an estimated speed of between 4,000 and 10,800 mph on a west, northwest heading. No visual contacts confirmed, likely not anomalous propagation (AP from here on).
    -9:35 to 9:55PM: Radar contact made by Bentwaters GCA showing 12-15 UREs 8 miles southwest of base. Targets moving between 80-125 mph constantly becoming stationary for some minutes then resuming northeast direction, finally merging into one URE before disappearing at speeds between 400-700 mph on the continued northeasterly course. No confirmed visuals, it is possible this was AP however.
    -10:00PM: Third URE picked up bye Bentwaters GCA 30 miles east of Bentwaters moving west. Observed for 16 seconds at a calculated speed of between 4,000 and 12,000 mph. No confirmed visuals, likely not AP.
    -10:55PM: Bentwaters GCA picked up a forth hit 3o miles east moving west at 2,000-4,000 mph. Also visually seen by a pilot of a C-47 and personal in the Bentwaters control tower. Object appeared to be at 4,000 feet and was visually seen at the same time as radar contact. It appears that at one point the UFO seems to possibly accelerate to 18,000 mph instantly as it disappears from one side of the scope and appears on the other side all in the same sweep. The distance in between is 60 miles. Lakenheath AFB then called.
    -11:40PM to 3:30AM: Lakenheath RATCC, CPS-5, GCA, and CPN-4 pick up UFO on radar. Contact initially made 20-25 miles southwest of Lakenheath with speeds between 400-600 mph, again with sudden stops and near instant acceleration. (This all happens at different times in this 4 hour 50 minute period, although BOTH ground and air radar was simultaneous when jet was in pursuit)Venom jet scrambled to intercept UFO at around 11:50PM. Pilot of Venom aircraft reports visual contact and radar contact with UFO which then proceeds to chase him before pulling away after the pilot starts to return to base because of low fuel. UFO eventually vanishes around 3:30AM. Likely not AP or a radar malfunction.

    Helpful Links
    Lakenheath Collaboration
    Lakenheath Directory


    3. Alternate Explanations and Official Conclusions

    Alternate Explanations

  • Mirage or confusion of the Moon, a star, or a planet- This is possible since both Mars and Saturn (Saturn in fact was in an Inferior Conjunction with the Moon) were very prominent that night but fails to take into account the radar hits and multiple vector visual reports. Also Saturn was not visible for the total duration of the incident. Although reports of "amber colored lights" by civilian witnesses could possibly be attributed to Mars it still can not explain the radar contacts, changes in direction, and other visuals by pilots. As far as a mirage of the Moon, this is highly unlikely as the data shows it was not visible after 11 PM.

    Link to Astronomical Data

  • Radar malfunction- This is highly unlikely because multiple tests were ran continuously throughout the event to make sure the radar was functioning correctly, and it was. Even further evidence against this is the fact that there were multiple radars that picked up the objects also. So unless they all were malfunctioning this is not the case.

  • Weather balloon- For many reasons this is near impossible, the first being the high rate of speed (up to possibly 18,000 mph at times) of the UFOs. Secondly, there were none in the area reported that night. Lastly, the maneuvers made by the UFO rule out any weather pattern driven event like a weather balloon. Although this could cause radar hits, it would not be able to fly at the speeds and maneuvers recorded. This statement from the RAF Balloon Unit should dismiss this theory:

    This file is for the RAF Balloon Unit at RAF Cardington.

    There were no balloon launches following the one at Liverpool on July 19th until the one at Usworth on August 16th. These balloon launches were also tethered as most were used for parachute jumps. Again some balloons escaped and had to be reported to ATCC Uxbridge. Balloons were not to be flown when winds exceeded 18 knots.

    Lakenheath Collaboration

  • Anomalous Propagation/Perseid Meteor Shower combination- The most likely alternate explanation here is a combination of two things; anomolous propagation and meteors from the Perseid Meteor Shower. Anomalous propagation is the phenomena encountered in radar echoes that causes false returns that are normally observed in a super refraction in a temperature inversion that directs the radar beam to the ground, in turn causing the radars processing program to wrongly place the beam at the height and distance it would have been under normal conditions. This causes false hits that can appear like solid targets when in reality there is nothing there at all. Radar was still relatively new at the time of this incident and unlike todays more sophisticated programs, was plagued by this pneumonia much more. Although the false targets normally remain stationary, spread laterally, and vary in intensity over time it is still possible that at least some of the false hits in the case could be attributed to this phenomenon. The second contact very well could be AP, but the others, especially 4 and 5 seem near impossible to be AP. The fact that in those contacts the URE was in a "stop and go" motion, along with the fact that the direction was against the prevailing winds seems to rule this out in all likelihood.

    Image showing temperature inversion courtesy of

  • At this time the Perseid Meteor Shower was underway and thus could attribute to some of the visuals. However this explanation does not seem to account for the radar hits alone so it seems more likely that any alternate explanation would be a rare combination of anomalous propagation and the meteor shower. The only problem with the meteor theory however is that it does not explain the passing of the object under the C-47 at 4,000 feet and the "fly by" the control tower. It also can not explain the UFO that chased the Venom.

    Image of a meteor courtesy of

    Continued Below...

  • posted on Jul, 6 2009 @ 12:58 PM
    Information regarding the intensity of the meteor stream on the night of contact:

    The Perseid meteor radiant shows unusual mobility and descends across more than 50° of arc from moderately high elevation in the east towards the northeast between about July 25 and August 17, moving from about 2°RA 41°Dec in Andromeda across the celestial N of Perseus to 68°RA 61°Dec in Camelopardus, reaching a maximum of around 50 particles per hour around August 10-12 and dwindling rapidly over the next five nights or so. On the night of August 13-14 the shower has passed its maximum and the radiant is only about 10° of azimuth from its terminal position in the NNE. [Tver, Motz & Hartmann, 1979] Neil Bone, head of the Meteor Section of the British Astronomical Association, concurs that the 1956 maximum had occurred on August 11-12 and that by the night of 13-14 rates would probably have fallen to around 20 particles per hour.

    Lakenheath Collaboration

    Chart showing position of stream in the sky courtesy of the Lakenheath Collaboration

    Official Conclusions

    Blue Book personal came to the conclusion that it was unlikely that a meteorological or astronomical source was responsible for all of the UFOs reported. Here is a statement made by USAF officer Paula W. Stimson:

    Paula W. Stimson, Cwpt. USAF, Intelligence Officer, 3910th ABGRU (SAC), RWF station Lakenheath, Suffolk, England. All personnel interviewed and logs of RATCC lend reality to the existence of some unexplainable flying phenomena near this air field on this occasion. No Air Base; however, the controllers are experienced and technical skills were used in attempts to determine just what the objects were. When the target would stop on the scope, the MTI was used. However, the target would still appear on the scope. All ground observers and reports from observers at Bentwaters agree on colour, maneuvers and shape of object. My analysis of the sightings is that they were real and not figments of the imagination. The fact that three radar sets picked up the targets simultaneously is certainly conclusive that a target or object was in the air. The maneuvers of the object were extraordinary; however, the fact that radar and ground visual observations were made on its rapid acceleration and abrupt stops certainly lend credulance to the report. It is not believed these sightings were of any meteorological or astronomical origins.

    Lakenheath Collaboration

    A very unusual conclusion from the Condon Committee was given in this case, with the report stating that at least one UFO appeared to be genuine:

    The probability that anomalous propagation of radar signals may have been involved in this case seems to be small. One or two details are suggestive of AP, particularly the reported disappearance of the first track as the UFO appeared to over fly the Bentwaters GCA radar. Against this must be weighed the Lakenheath controller's statement that there was "little or no traffic or targets on scope," which is not at all suggestive of AP conditions, and the behavior of the target near Lakenheath -- apparently continuous and easily tracked. The "tailing" of the RAF fighter, taken alone, seems to indicate a possible ghost image, but this does not jibe with the report that the UFO stopped following the fighter, as the latter was returning to its base, and went off in a different direction. The radar operators were apparently careful to calculate the speed of the UFO from distances and elapsed times, and the speeds were reported as consistent from run to run, between stationary episodes. This behavior would be somewhat consistent with reflections from moving atmospheric layers -- but not in so many different directions.
    Visual mirage at Bentwaters seems to be out of the question because of the combined ground and airborne observations; the C47 pilot apparently saw the UFO below him. The visual objects do not seem to have been meteors; statements by the observers that meteors were numerous imply that they were able to differentiate the UFO from the meteors.
    In summary, this is the most puzzling and unusual case in the radar-visual files. The apparently rational, intelligent behavior of the UFO suggests a mechanical device of unknown origin as the most probable explanation of this sighting. However, in view of the inevitable fallibility of witnesses, more conventional explanations of this report cannot be entirely ruled out.
    "In conclusion, although conventional or natural explanations certainly cannot be ruled out, the probability of such seems low in this case and the probability that at least one genuine UFO was involved appears to be fairly high." ( minor edit for clarity)

    Renown skeptic Phillip Klass suggested that the radar hits were results of faulty MTI equipment and that the rest can be explained by AP and the Perseid meteors, as well witness confusion. As I have stated earlier this case is poorly ordered and has many conflicting reports, although the core of the case seems to hold up. Here is a newer report headed by Dr. David Clarke (part of the "Lakenheath Collaboration"):

    Four British Fortean researchers, Dr David Clarke, Andy Roberts, Martin Shough, and Jenny Randles, have since conducted a study that has indicated that the incident, or incidents, were very much more complex than the Condon Report had suggested.
    Most significantly, the aircrews originally involved in the incident, F/Os David Chambers and John Brady from the first aircraft and F/Os Ian Fraser-Ker and Ivan Logan from the second, were located and interviewed. The aircrews involved all flew with 23 Squadron from RAF Waterbeach and were scrambled at 02:00 and 02:40 on 14 August - around two hours later than Wimbledon and Perkins claimed the interceptions occurred.
    In contrast to the reports given in the original classified teletype and in the accounts of both Wimbledon and Perkins, the aircrews both stated that the radar contacts obtained were unimpressive and that no 'tail-chase', or action on the part of the target, occurred. They also asserted no visual contacts were made. The first pilot, Chambers, commented that "my feeling is that there was nothing there, it was some sort of mistake",[12] while Ivan Logan, the second Venom's navigator, stated that "all we saw was a blip which rather indicated a stationary target".[13] At the time 23 Squadron decided that the radar contact had, if anything, been with a weather balloon.

    Now Wimbledon strongly disagrees with this report and maintains what he said in earlier years. The new report also included the addition of the fact that the T-33 "Shooting Star" trainer was diverted earlier in the night to investigate and found nothing. In addition to this new information has came to light that states yet another Venom aircraft was scrambled earlier in the evening but lost one of its fuel tanks shortly after take off and had to return to base. The pilots of this reported failed intercept were Leslie Arthur and Grahame Scofield, who stated they were not told the nature of the target. But in classic contradictory nature of this case the navigator, Grahme Scofield stated that he listened to the radio transmissions of the later successful intercept of the UFO and it was exactly as Wimbeldon and Perkens described, and the UFO did chase the aircraft. Also the time and direction of Scofields failed flight is consistent with a civilian witness statement that claimed to see anomalous lights near Ely.

    It should also be stated that the RAF said there was no live or synthetic exercises on the date this occurred.

    Link to Exercise Date Chart

    This letter from the Ministry of Defence (MoD) about the incident:

    Letter from L.W. Ackhurst, S4 Air, Ministry of Defence, to P.R. Smith, dated 31 March 1969

    The Ministry of Defence investigates reports of UFOs because of their possible air defence implications. However, we do not undertake to pursue our enquiries until we have established in every case an absolute correlation with a known occurrence. Your report and our subsequent check of aerial activity did not provide sufficient information to enable us to tell you what you saw. But we are satisfied that there was no aerial activity in the area which had air defence implications.
    I am afraid I am unable to comment on the press cutting covering a UFO report made in 1956 since details of reports prior to 1962 are no longer available. All Ministry of Defence papers are retained for periods relating to the importance of the papers and in the case of unidentified flying objects they may be disposed of after five years. Should it ever appear that a report was of special significance, then the papers would, of course, be retained for a longer period. This has not yet been found necessary.
    Yours sincerely
    L.W. Ackhurst.

    Lakenheath Collaboration

    Continued Below...

    posted on Jul, 6 2009 @ 12:58 PM
    So the MoDs official position is that what the UFO was is unknown but NOT a threat to air defense. There was not really an extensive UFO related research project by the British surrounding this event, unlike in the United States. Possibly because the bases were under US control at the time? Either way there eventually was quite a bit of research into this event from both sides later on. It is also important to note that this is still an ongoing investigation even now, with FOIA documentation still being anticipated. The conclusion from all places 'official' is still the same for the most part;UNKNOWN.

    Relevant Links
    Rockefeller Briefing Document
    COMETA Report
    Condon Report
    Lakenheath Collaboration

    4. My Conclusions

    This case is very important in ufology because of its broad spectrum 'unknown' classification throughout the investigatory community. Even the Condon Report, which always seems to find a rational explanation for UFO incidents came to a conclusion that at least one UFO was real, now what it was is a different story. The case being a "Radar/Visual" case, which is somewhat rare, also gives it importance and evidence that is hard to dismiss to the mundane. It is unfortunate because a lot of general people do not know of this case. In addition the case is also a "Close Encounter of the First Kind", since the UFO was on the Venoms tail and within 500 feet of it at one point. So in reality this case is both a "Radar/Visual" and "CE1". As far as any prosaic explanations given thus far, I believe that none can fully account for everything. The biggest thing in my opinion is the 'chase', if true (and there is no reason to think it is not, although some reports conflict with it) then what possible explanation could there be as to what was chasing the Venom? The intelligent-like maneuvers and extremely rapid speeds (sometimes in the area of Mach18) observed by multiple visual and radar sources makes me think that this was truly some type of aircraft that is unknown. Of course it could be some unknown electromagnetic or plasma phenomena, who knows? Now am I saying that these UFOs were piloted by aliens from another solar system? No, I am not, for that one must take into accounts other cases and reports that do give credence to at least some UFOs being piloted by lifeforms of a non-terrestrial origin.

    Like I stated in the opening, this case is not nearly as documented and orderly as others. There is missing information, widespread information, and conflicting reports. Fortunately what is known maintains the core of the case which because it is so strong, is more than enough to jolt this case into one of the tops ever. If the missing information ever comes to light, as well a unified report (like the Lakenheath Collaboration is trying to do) then this case may be the top case that is impossible to explain and could be the forefront of ufology and force everyone to admit that UFOs exist. There are many more cases like this as well. In fact ufology is full of great cases that the public is simply not aware of, that is why I am trying to create in-depth threads of some of the best cases, so they can get out to mainstream view(ATS is a great medium to do this). This case as similarities with the "Gorman UFO Dogfight" of the late forties, so maybe we can 'connect the dots' and start to label and document these craft better, for example, in both these cases we have a fast moving, bright lighted, white 'orb shaped' UFO. So obviously there is something related going on here that is worthy of more than just saying "we don't know but we don't think it is a threat to national security."! In conclusion, my final opinion of this case is that at least one, likely many of the UFOs were actually unknown aircraft, and again in my opinion I think they were likely either piloted by extraterrestrials or remotely controlled by them, like a drone or possibly a self thinking probe. I for one look forward to more information about this case and multitudes of others and hope that one day soon we can have an answer to this very real and very active (still today) phenomena.


    Sources, Related Threads, and My Related Threads
    The Lakenheath Collaboration

    Related Threads
    Top 100 UFO Cases- Revealed!
    UFO mystery at RAF Lakenheath

    My Related Threads
    The 1952 Tremonton, Utah UFO Fleet
    The Chiles-Whitted UFO Incident: Eastern Airlines Flight 576 and The "Rocket Ship"
    The Gorman UFO Dogfight
    The Mantell UFO Incident

    posted on Jul, 6 2009 @ 01:44 PM
    These are the types of cases that make the phenomenon so compelling. Those speeds are simply overwhelming.

    posted on Jul, 6 2009 @ 01:50 PM
    reply to post by fls13

    I agree, especially the radar AND visual conformations. I mean when you have multiple radars pick it up, both on ground and on a jet, as well multiple visuals it is near impossible to explain mundanely. Even the skeptical Condon Committee said there was at least one true UFO.

    posted on Jul, 6 2009 @ 01:58 PM
    reply to post by jkrog08

    It's supply and demand. The demand for extraordinary cases and evidence is insatiable far outstrips the supply.

    In roughly 60 years of the modern UFO phenomenon, how many truly astonishing cases are there, a couple hundred at most? If you triple that number under the assumption that some great stuff never gets reported or comes to public attention, that still only leaves a handful per year.

    posted on Jul, 6 2009 @ 02:11 PM
    reply to post by jkrog08

    Radar visuals are very compelling. They are seen by numerous people who are trained in observation and are backed up by radar and other electronic monitoring devices. Thank you for researching this case.

    posted on Jul, 6 2009 @ 02:12 PM
    SPECTACULAR! Thread. Simply stunning work! I myself, believe that it was a UFO. The evidence that you posted seems to solidify this view in my mind. Whether it was alien or not is another story.. But that was simply excellent info and extremely organized. It was an absolute pleasure to read.
    Starred and Flagged. The UFO board here should be honored to have this master thread here
    and another great contribution from a highly ABOVE quality member

    posted on Jul, 6 2009 @ 02:50 PM
    reply to post by TheMythLives

    THANK YOU, I just hope this doesnt get lost in the 30000000000000 flagged youtube orb video,lol. I try to do what I can for this board.

    posted on Jul, 6 2009 @ 02:56 PM
    Thank you! great research as always. This case is one of the best in recent times with many credible witnesses as well as radar contact. I ran across some information and started a thread on it here. Thanks again, great job, star and flag
    Colonel Charles Halt (Ret) “The UFOs I Saw Were Structured Machines”

    posted on Jul, 6 2009 @ 02:57 PM
    Sorry I forgot to post the link. Sorry for the one liner

    posted on Jul, 6 2009 @ 03:03 PM
    reply to post by jkrog08
    Good thread as usual. The main criticism is that you never leave much for anyone else to add! I was glad to see the David Clarke site linked...he and Jenny Randles have probably done more investigation than the original inquiries. Although Jenny Randles is often looking for evidence to support her beliefs, Clark is more skeptical and open-minded. He appears to have less of an investment in ETUFO beliefs. There's a rather good pdf document by Randles...Collision Course

    As is always the case, it remains inconclusive. Two aircrew filed the UFO as a probable weather balloon and remained uniformed about surrounding events for decades. Whatever the mystery of what actually prompted this response from Ralph Noyes (retired Under Secretary of State)...

    "Here we had a number of object seen coming in across the North Sea on coastal radar. It looked like a Russian mistake. Jet aircraft were scrambled. The objects were travelling at quite impossible speeds like 4-5000 mph and then came to an abrupt halt near to one of these stations not very high up. Jet aircraft picked them up on aircraft radar. The objects then simply made rings round them.

    "Inevitably this led to the sort of enquiry which you would put in hand if you had any military responsibilities. Had something gone wrong with ground radar or with aircraft radar? We experienced pilots going out of their minds? Were people having fantasies? We *had* to investigate cases of that kind. Over the years - although there were not an enormous number of such cases - there were a sufficient number to persuade me, and a number of air staff friends with whom I had to work, that something was going on, sporadically, in British airspace which we could not explain.

    "But we did not particularly want to make public statements about that. Not for something that we had no explanation."
    The Lakenheath UFOs

    This is the original report sent from RAF Lakenheath to all the usual suspects in these cases...Headquarters Air Defence Command, Ent AFB, Colorado Springs; 7th Air Division (ADC), South Ruislip, England; Air Technical Intelligence Center (Blue Book), Wright-Patterson AFB, Dayton, Ohio; and Headquarters Air Force Intelligence, Washington D.C.

    11. Position title and comments of the preparing officer, including his preliminary analysis of the possible cause of the sightings(s). Paula W. Stimson, Cwpt. USAF, Intelligence Officer, 3910th ABGRU (SAC), RWF station Lakenheath, Suffolk, England.

    All personnel interviewed and logs of RATCC lend reality to the existance of some unexplainable flying phenomena near this air field on this occasion. No Air Base; however, the controllers are experienced and technical skills were used in attempts to determine just what the objects were. When the target would stop on the scope, the MTI was used. However, the target would still appear on the scope. All ground observers and reports from observers at Bentwaters agree on colour, maneuvers and shape of object. My analysis of the sightings is that they were real and not figments of the imagination.

    continued in...Teletype BOI-485, August 16 1956

    Those darn 1950s were a very busy time for UFOs rushing around in sovereign airspace!

    posted on Jul, 6 2009 @ 03:10 PM
    I have to give it to you Jkrog!! Awesome thread once again. I love all your posts because they are not only informative, but easy to read and understand. I probably wouldve never known as much about this or other cases if you didnt make these awesome threads! Keep up the good work. S&F

    posted on Jul, 6 2009 @ 04:01 PM
    Ha! I though at first when I read the title you were trying to look into that SHAM of a case that is known as "Rendlesham". Any effort to breath life into that is only preaching to the severely uniformed and ignorant, plain and simple. In fact, the only people that still defend that case are true believers that have a knack for completely and totally "ignoring the facts". Ha, I finally got to use my screen name.

    Anyway, great thread and a good read. Wish I could say more, but there is no where to really go with this, other than to lump it into the every few cases that merit skeptical attention. It is a shame that is where stuff like this ends, on the cutting room floor...while other sham cases like Roswell and Rendlsham get the limelight from the book sellers and internet ingorants.

    posted on Jul, 6 2009 @ 04:05 PM
    reply to post by Kandinsky

    The main criticism is that you never leave much for anyone else to add!

    That is a good thing though, you know?lol.........I decided to format my threads like this because I was sick of all the believer-skeptic wars, so I PUT AN END TO IT ON MY PART! Plus it is much better this way, I present everything, all skeptical possibilities and all. These threads are more for 'read only', with the occasional "thank you once again",lol and the small additions other member might add. I mean this is the only way to present these cases, totally neutral and closed. These threads in this ongoing anthology are more like encyclopedia entries aimed at getting the best cases out to the mainstream in a scientific manner. So see, I took care of everything, no need to derail, just read, learn, and enjoy!

    Glad you dropped by my friend!

    posted on Jul, 6 2009 @ 04:10 PM
    reply to post by IgnoreTheFacts

    Yes, this is a great case but I think Roswell and Randlesham are legit as well. Anyways like you said, this with so many others is not meant to be proof in my threads, cause there is no 100% proof. All I am trying to do is get the best and most scientifically documented cases out to the public, in an attempt to educate and jumpstart large scale interests in ufology. If people see cases like this then they will want a massive investigation IMO. All I am doing is presenting articles on the top cases to try and convince people this event is VERY REAL. Thanks for your kind words and dropping by!

    [edit on 7/6/2009 by jkrog08]

    posted on Jul, 6 2009 @ 04:12 PM
    reply to post by jkrog08

    So see, I took care of everything, no need to derail, just read, learn, and enjoy!

    Yep, the new line of ATS members that do this, we are But we know our stuff
    I learned a lot from this thread and as always, since I am a skeptic I don't have much to add, since my positions were covered and discussed well. The only way to do a case to the fullest is through unbiased, neutral presentations. Which my friend I think you did quite well.

    posted on Jul, 6 2009 @ 04:13 PM
    You can forget about publicizing cases like this over the internet in order to jump start legitimate interest and investigation into the subject.

    You must first get rid of the giggle factor that the believers have saddled us with before that can happen. People don't want to hear that, but it is 100% true.

    new topics

    top topics

    <<   2  3  4 >>

    log in