The Lakenheath-Bentwaters UFO Incident, page 2

privacy

Pages: << 1 2 3 4 5 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 81 times

reply posted on 6-7-2009 @ 04:16 PM by jkrog08

reply to post by IgnoreTheFacts

Yea but you get rid of that by presenting solid cases like this and many more, what other way is there? I tend to post solid science, documents, and witness based cases referenced by many sources, so we will see.

reply posted on 6-7-2009 @ 04:29 PM by Xtraeme

Good thread.

If it weren't for R/V cases I would have chalked all UFOs up to wishful-thinking and misidentification.

The '56 Lakenheath / Bentwaters / Sculthorpe case always rises to the top of my short-list, largely due to the night-watch supervisors letter, as it was submitted to the Condon Committee:

In 1956, sometime between January and September (I can't remember the exact date or month), I was on duty as Watch Supervisor at Lakenheath RAF Station, England, (a USAF base), in the Radar Air Traffic Control Center. It was the 5:00 P.M. to midnight shift. I had either four or five other controllers on my shift. I was sitting at the Supervisor's Coordinating desk and received a call on the direct line (actually, I'm not sure which line it was). Anyway, it was Sculthorpe GCA Unit calling and the radar operator asked me if we had any targets on our scopes traveling at 4,000 MPH. They said they had watched a target on their scopes proceed from a point 30 or 40 miles east of Sculthorpe to a point 40 miles west of Sculthorpe. The target passed directly over Sculthorpe, England, RAF Station (also a USAF Station). He said the tower reported seeing it go by and just appeared to be a blurry light. A C47 flying over the base at 5,000 feet altitude also reported seeing it as a blurred light that passed under his aircraft. No report as to actual distance below the aircraft. I immediately had all controllers start scanning the radar scopes. I had each scope set on a different range -- from 10 miles to 200 miles radius of Lakenheath. At this time I did not contact anyone by telephone as I was rather skeptical of this report. We were using ______ on our radar, which eliminated entirely all ground returns and stationary targets. There was very little or not [sic] traffic or targets on the scopes, as I recall. However, one controller noticed a stationary target on the scopes about 20 to 25 miles southwest. This was unusual as a stationary target should have been eliminated unless it was moving at a speed of at least 40 to 45 knots. And yet we could detect no movement at all. We watched this target on all the different scopes for several minutes and I called the GCA Unit at Lakenheath to see if they had this target on their scopes also. They confirmed the target was on their scope in the same geographical location. As we watched, the stationary target started moving at a speed of 400 to 600 MPH in a north/northeast direction until it reached a point about 20 miles north/northwest of Lakenheath. There was no slow start or build-up to this speed -- it was constant from the second it started to move until it stopped.

[edit on 6-7-2009 by Xtraeme]

Mod Edit: Trimmed quote -- see source info in post below

[edit on 7/7/09/07 by junglejake]

reply posted on 6-7-2009 @ 04:30 PM by Xtraeme

(continued)

Source: Hynek, Josef (1997). The Hynek UFO Report. Barnes & Noble. ISBN 0760704295. pg. 120-125

Online transcript
[edit on 6-7-2009 by Xtraeme]

Mod edit: Included link to online source of above quote

[edit on 7/7/09/07 by junglejake]

reply posted on 6-7-2009 @ 04:44 PM by jkrog08

reply to post by Xtraeme

EXCELLENT ADDITION my friend!

Yes, cases like this and others give HUGE credibility to a very real UFO phenomena.

reply posted on 6-7-2009 @ 04:51 PM by Haydn_17

At least nobody became hostile, but it does make me wonder if they are testing our air defence.

reply posted on 6-7-2009 @ 05:03 PM by vertol

Wow ,nice one ,cannot belive I did not no any of this !
I was there in 1980 tdy at bentwaters ab ,from nellis afb with bran new
f-16's when they came back ,had to have been the nuclear bomb dump,
they had there .bentwaters at that time had A-10's ( non-nuclear a/c )
we were there for a month ,and loaded nuc's on a daily basis ,that was
the main weapon of the F-16 at the hight of the cold war ,that was are forward
operation base from nellis ,the whole month they demonstrated in front of the
base ,with no-nuc's stuff ,the people new what was there....thanx for all that info !.

reply posted on 6-7-2009 @ 05:26 PM by Xtraeme

Originally posted by vertol
Wow ,nice one ,cannot belive I did not no any of this !
I was there in 1980 tdy at bentwaters ab ,from nellis afb with bran new
f-16's when they came back ,had to have been the nuclear bomb dump,
they had there .bentwaters at that time had A-10's ( non-nuclear a/c )
we were there for a month ,and loaded nuc's on a daily basis ,that was
the main weapon of the F-16 at the hight of the cold war ,that was are forward
operation base from nellis ,the whole month they demonstrated in front of the
base ,with no-nuc's stuff ,the people new what was there....thanx for all that info !.

Interesting, so you're aware of an active nuclear stockpile in '56? Do you remember which base exactly had the dump?

reply posted on 6-7-2009 @ 06:23 PM by vertol

They were stored at Bentwaters,but at that time Lakenheath had F-111F's wich when the a/c was configured correctly they would have 2 bombs in the bay ,with the gun removed ,and the 2 inboard pivot pylons were nuc consent capable ,so they could carry 4 , B-61's but they were mass stored at Bentwaters.

reply posted on 6-7-2009 @ 06:26 PM by vertol

sorry ment F-111E's ,australia had F-111F's ,I worked on the D model in clovis new mexico .

reply posted on 6-7-2009 @ 06:38 PM by fls13

Originally posted by jkrog08
reply to post by IgnoreTheFacts

Yea but you get rid of that by presenting solid cases like this and many more, what other way is there? I tend to post solid science, documents, and witness based cases referenced by many sources, so we will see.

You can't lead your life concerned with what others will think or how they will react. I am interested in this subject and don't give an Unidentified Flying F**k what other people think.

reply posted on 6-7-2009 @ 07:02 PM by missvicky

reply to post by jkrog08

Very fine article! I always like to read your posts. You mentioned something that I have,t seen discussed much (not that I'm a UFO scholar).
You said you thought it could be a "self-thinking" craft.
I've seen alot of the videos posted here by credible researchers such as yourself, and got to wondering if they , the crafts, aren't the intelligent beings themselves? Maybe some sort of "organic technology" or a super advanced AI? Is there much discussion about this idea among researchers, and if so, is it a relatively new theory?

reply posted on 6-7-2009 @ 07:03 PM by jkrog08

reply to post by fls13

You can't lead your life concerned with what others will think or how they will react. I am interested in this subject and don't give an Unidentified Flying F**k what other people think

Well this is a passion for me, I will stop at NOTHING to get the truth out to the masses and educate them. I think some here at ATS still do not realize that about me. This is more than a "interesting site to discuss fringe topics" for me.The is a site (epic and great) where I can collaborate with some of the best UFO minds in the world (IMO) and have a excellent medium to get these good cases to the public, since ATS has over a million viewers a day. I am not here only to educate and share information with other members, but to present and educate and share with THE WORLD. For I feel that the first step to getting the truth is to get more people aware, and by more I mean MILLIONS IF NOT BILLIONS. If I myself can start one little spark that can propel us into disclosure and the ultimate and real truth then all my time put into ATS and making threads will be worth it a million times over.

So yes, I do care what other people think of UFOs, because right now ufology is so disorganized with absolutely NO gameplan to move forward with. I am personally sick of being called fringe or silly, although the majority of the world think ETs exist somewhere, I am out to prove they exist HERE and have been and the world governments, specifically the US government has been lying to WE THE PEOPLE for at least 60 years, possibly many more. So I am taking charge and setting the direction, as well others (though not enough) who have came to the same logical gameplan I have:To educate the masses and garner widespread interest and anger for the lies. Only then can we take the next step and seriously consider getting the governments to answer our calls for disclosure, or at the very least give us the crucial missing pieces of evidence so many cases need to be confirmed. This is a multi-stage game my friend, and we just now are still trying to get stage one started. So in conclusion, I WILL ALWAYS WORRY about the public perception of the epic UFO EPOCH. I ask that all do the same to whatever capabilities they can or feel comfortable with. THIS IS NOT A GAME, this is real, this is happening, and WE NEED TRUTH!

Continue Stage One....

[edit on 7/6/2009 by jkrog08]

reply posted on 6-7-2009 @ 07:08 PM by jkrog08

reply to post by missvicky

Yes there is discussion, and it is highly likely that at least some crafts are, while others may be some type of "thinking energy" that we do not yet understand. It is also possible some are remotely controlled from orbit or totally autonomous. Hyperdimensional beings or craft are also possible, as it has been highly postulated that at least some ETs are from another spatial dimension. The Internet is a useful tool for all this information my friend, there is nothing that ufologist know that is classified,lol! Thank you for your support and kind words.

reply posted on 6-7-2009 @ 07:12 PM by TheMythLives

reply to post by jkrog08

As a skeptic, I am actually thrilled that you are so dedicated. Infact I am all for a ufology class or some sort of ufology related organization for the public. I would take that course only because it sounds interesting and the subject matter is also incredibly interesting! So I am right their with you, while we may differ on who steers the UFO's..lol.. That doesn't mean that their is no truth in having a ufology network for the public

I am all for it.

reply posted on 6-7-2009 @ 07:36 PM by laura petrie

Excellent, excellent, excellent thread!
Flagged it, of course.

Well researched and well presented. A highly useful thread to show to people who say that UFOs and UFOlogists are just some attention seeking crackpots with no real evidence to back up their outlandish claims.

Keep up the good work!

reply posted on 6-7-2009 @ 07:54 PM by ArMaP

Another great thread, very well presented and with a more neutral point of view on the facts section, something I think is very important to make the presentation even stronger.

Great work!

Originally posted by jkrog08
Well this is a passion for me, I will stop at NOTHING to get the truth out to the masses and educate them.

Even more important than that, I think that you are not afraid of getting educated yourself, you do not have that "blind faith" that affects too much people on the UFO scene.

I think you are on the right track.

PS: this case I already knew.

reply posted on 6-7-2009 @ 08:13 PM by rapinbatsisaltherage

Another wonderful thread of yours. I greatly appreciate the way you present content! S&F.

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

That picture is worth, like, 100,000 words. Looks like something someone would doodle while watching The Twilight Zone.

[edit on 6-7-2009 by rapinbatsisaltherage]

reply posted on 6-7-2009 @ 08:38 PM by jkrog08

reply to post by ArMaP

Thank you for your kind words my friend, it is members like you, as well many others that help complete this circle of legitimate ufology research.

Thoughts on case?

reply to post by rapinbatsisaltherage

Thanks rapin,

that picture on the panel really shows how serious and life changing this was to the persons involved. It shows how in many places UFOs have become a deep rooted part of our very human paradigms. Great observation as usual!

[edit on 7/6/2009 by jkrog08]

reply posted on 6-7-2009 @ 08:56 PM by fls13

Anyone on here speak Russian? This looks like a pretty interesting military case with some solid interviews and the animated recreations are good but I'd like to know the details of what they are saying.

YouTube Link

reply posted on 6-7-2009 @ 10:07 PM by jkrog08

reply to post by fls13

Hem, I have no idea, I tried a quick search and translated by Google but they do not give a location in the comment section, I know ATS member Schrodingers Dog speaks 5 languages, maybe Russian?

Pages: << 1 2 3 4 5 >> ^^TOP^^