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.

 

UFO shoots down rocket: Big Sur/ Vandenburg UFO incident

page: 1
13
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 14 2010 @ 04:10 PM
link   
On September 15, 1964 the USAF were testing rockets at Vandenberg AFB. Then, as now, the tests were filmed to provide data and record the results for research and development. Standard practice and happens to this day.

What makes the tests interesting is the claim by Dr Robert Jacobs that one of the test flights involved UFO interference. According to his testimony, a UFO was filmed darting around the unarmed rocket and firing a beam that disabled it and caused it to crash. He was the guy who filmed it.




The 1369th Photographic Squadron dispatched from Vandenberg Air Force Base unwittingly filmed the UFO while tracking the missile some 60 miles above the Pacific Ocean. Two days later, Chief Science Officer at Vandenberg AFB, Major Florenz J. Mansmann, summoned Jacobs to his office to view the film. Among those present in Mansmann's office were two CIA agents from Washington, D.C.

As the men watched the rocket soar high in the sky, an unidentified light swims into the picture and encircles the rocket, emitting brilliant, strobe-like flashes, around the missile Upon closer inspection of the film, Mansmann confirmed later the light was definitely "saucer-shaped". According to Jacobs, the warhead malfunctioned while in flight, and fell several hundred miles short of its intended target. Mansmann tells Jacobs to keep quiet about the incident, and the two CIA agents leave with the film, which has never been seen again.
NICAP

After making the claim, Jacobs drew the attention of the USAF and Philip Klass. He was roundly criticised by Klass and the USAF denied he worked for them in the mid-60s or had a 1000" Telescope at Big Sur. Subsequently, it was found that they did have such telescopes and Jacobs was employed by the USAF in the area of photography. link

What elevates this story above the standard 'ex-serviceman says' stories is that 20+ years later, Major Mansmann wrote letters that supported Jacobs' claims. These letters are the reason why I've written the thread. I've looked for an original source of the letters and particularly the one cited in the MUFON article dated September 1988.


In a letter from Florenz Mansmann (May 6, 1987), he confirmed Robert Jacobs' account of the incident that is described in detail in issue No. 225 of the Journal. Mansmann states he ordered Jacobs not to discuss the incident with anyone "... because of the nature of the launch, the failure of the launch mission and the probability that the optical instrumentation (the film) showed an interference with normal launch patterns."

Mansmann confirmed he studied the film, having screened it on four different occasions. Mansmann said he viewed the film "once in my quality control review and editing for the General and his staff; once in review with the Chief Scientist and his assistant; once for the Commanding General with only one of his staff; and a fourth time with the Chief Scientist, his assistant, the three government men and Bob Jacobs."
September 1988 MUFON Journal

There's no confirmation of a UFO shooting down a rocket here...just an implication in the context of the article. In another article by Jacobs we see quotes that are far more definitive...


"Dr. Bob opened a Pandora's box and in the last few months I have been bombarded with phone calls and letters. I try to answer the sincere ones. First, the Enquirer story was true except the date was 1964. I was in Vietnam in '65. Telescopic photography of that magnitude makes sizes undeterminable. We knew the missile size but could not compare since we did not know how far from the missile the 'object' was at time of beam release. Maneuverability was also at question for the same reason. Propulsion was plasma like but not probable. In such gravity, plasma induced speed and maneuverability would not seem possible. From clarity, action and situation in the film, the assumption was, at that time, extraterrestrial. Details would be sketchy and from memory, the shape was classic disc, the center seemed to be a raised bubble, not sure any ports or slits could be seen but was stationary, or moving slightly- floating over the entire lower saucer shape, which was glowing and 'seemed' to be rotating slowly. At the point of beam release- if it was a beam, it, the object, turned like an object required to be in a position to fire from a platform---
Mansmann Letter 1983 (NICAP Big Sur)



This is an old story to many ATSers, but maybe worth reviving? I'm Swiss on this account and invite ATSers to knock me off the fence


Sources:

LOW KLASS: A Rejoinder by Dr. Bob Jacobs

The Big Sur ‘UFO’: An Identified Flying Object

UFO Filmed Circling Atlas Rocket

IN DEFENSE OF THE BIG SUR UFO FILMING:

The Big Sur UFO filming:




posted on May, 14 2010 @ 04:48 PM
link   
Well the video we have of the incident is fake,so what it comes down to is another person saying that the military is involved in some coverup.
You can search ATS there are existing threads on the topic they are probably under the name of the documentary that it was from.



posted on May, 14 2010 @ 04:57 PM
link   
reply to post by zaiger
 


Personally i think it a realy interesting story...I dont have the time to realy look in to it and was hopeing you could give a brife run down on what is the smoking gun that makes this fake...ill look into it my self later tonight or tomorrow.



posted on May, 14 2010 @ 05:00 PM
link   
reply to post by jammer2012
 




In the documentary it says on there "animated simulation". and i do believe he says that the film was taken and he never saw it again.

edit to add:
Out of the blue is what i think it was from.

[edit on 14-5-2010 by zaiger]



posted on May, 14 2010 @ 05:05 PM
link   
reply to post by zaiger
 


Zaiger.....



In the documentary it says on there "animated simulation".


But apart from that it could be the smoking gun, couldn't it?

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not



posted on May, 14 2010 @ 05:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Maybe...maybe not
 


Yes ... Yes it is.


In the second video he is not wearing his glasses. That could only mean that the reptilians have stolen his mind light.



posted on May, 14 2010 @ 05:14 PM
link   
reply to post by zaiger
 


Thanks for pointing that out....but if the film was taken wouldent they have to to have a "animated simulation" to get there point across...like i said i still dont know that much about this so im staying in the Gray with this.



posted on May, 14 2010 @ 05:17 PM
link   
reply to post by jammer2012
 


Well the animated simulation is exactly that a fake video made to get a point across. He is just trying to show what he saw. But that does not make his story less true it just means that video is not "evidence" of anything. Is he a liar? I don't know, he could be making it all up or he could be telling the truth. I do not really care in either case.



posted on May, 14 2010 @ 05:21 PM
link   
So, he lies, he dont work with what he claims and didnt see what he said he saw and the clip shown is the clip that was 'never seen agian' ?

Dont these people have families since they pop up on Tv talking Nonsence and lie their Arses off... What kind of books is this guy selling ?

Just like Ex.Minister of Defence from Canada, Mr. Hallyer, all of the sudden he starts talking trash and ruins his good reputation along with Edgar Mitchell, the 6th man on the Moon... Hmmm, Mark Ultra in the Works here guys ...

[edit on 14/5/2010 by ChemBreather]



posted on May, 14 2010 @ 05:33 PM
link   
reply to post by zaiger
 



Well the video we have of the incident is fake,so what it comes down to is another person saying that the military is involved in some coverup. You can search ATS there are existing threads on the topic they are probably under the name of the documentary that it was from.


What fake video? The claim is that footage was taken and hasn't been seen since. Jacobs claims to have recorded footage of something knocking out a rocket. I'm asking if anyone can find a source of the letters from Major Mansmann validating Jacobs' claims.



posted on May, 14 2010 @ 05:39 PM
link   
reply to post by jammer2012
 



Personally i think it a really interesting story...


Same here. I read about the story a long time back and looked for the Mansmann letter that corroborates Jacobs' story. All I could find was the MUFON article. Reading the low Klass article raises more questions. The OP is asking for more evidence of the Mansmann corroboration.



posted on May, 14 2010 @ 05:45 PM
link   
reply to post by Maybe...maybe not
 



But apart from that it could be the smoking gun, couldn't it?


I'm just curious about about Jacobs making the claim and apparently being supported by Mansmann years later. Like you, I can imagine a number of possible explanations. Smoking guns aren't likely, the question of the OP is trying to identify the credibility of the letters from Mansmann.



posted on May, 14 2010 @ 05:49 PM
link   
reply to post by Kandinsky
 


Kandinsky.....

I hope you didn't misconstrue my humour for flippancy......it's just that ZAIGER IS EVIL.

I'll have a really good look at your material during today


It's always been a very interesting case.

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not



posted on May, 14 2010 @ 05:51 PM
link   
reply to post by Kandinsky
 


I have not heard of these letters being found but according to this they do not answer much.
home.comcast.net...



posted on May, 14 2010 @ 06:10 PM
link   
reply to post by zaiger
 



I have not heard of these letters being found but according to this they do not answer much. home.comcast.net...


It's in the OP....no edits.



posted on May, 14 2010 @ 07:57 PM
link   
blah, this incident is sorta interesting but not much 'strong' evidence



posted on May, 15 2010 @ 06:40 AM
link   
Kingston George has written several articles on this -- one is linked in the OP -- that explain most of the questions raised in the discussion.

Problem 1 -- if the event was as epochal as Jacobs sincerely believes, why doesn't it appear in any other 'UFO whistle blower' stories?

Problem 2 -- George's explanation, that the film showed the malfunction of the missile's decoy deployment mechanism, a visual cue that the Soviets could have used to focus their anti-missile fire on the genuine warhead, is an entirely plausible explanation for the secrecy imposed on it and Jacobs' lack of knowledge of that Top Secret explanation (he wasn't cleared at that level).

As often seems to have happened, folks with real secret aerial activities to keep under wraps have been pleased that some observers misconstrued them as UFOs, and the camouflage -- opportunistic or deliberately engineered -- was effective, thanks to the mindless gullibility of so very many UFO enthusiasts.



posted on May, 16 2010 @ 02:44 AM
link   
reply to post by JimOberg
 




Problem 1 -- if the event was as epochal as Jacobs sincerely believes, why doesn't it appear in any other 'UFO whistle blower' stories?


you mean like this one ?



This day we were firing a Navy upper atmosphere missile. Shortly after its take-off, two small circular objects, guessed to be approximately 20 inches in diameter, appeared from no place and joined the Navy missile on its upward flight. (Similar small disks have also been previously reported as well as the larger types mentioned earlier.)

At about the time the Navy missile was doing well over 2,000 feet per second, the object on the west side passed through the exhaust gases and joined its friend on the east. They then apparently decided the missile was not going fast enough for them. They accelerated, passed the Navy missile and sailed off upward and eastward.

Some eight minutes after the Navy missile had fallen back into the range, I received a radio report from a very powerful optical observation post located on a mountain top. The Navy missile, it said, had just passed over the mountain and was going out of the range to the west. This could have been one of the two objects that we had seen and which had changed direction, or it could have been a third one.

The odd thing is that before long I had reports from eleven men in five separate OP's, none of which could communicate with each other and which were located at different points of the compass. All had seen the two objects perform as I have described.

www.nicap.org...



posted on May, 16 2010 @ 03:39 AM
link   
reply to post by easynow
 


Easynow.....

At risk of being off topic briefly.....

This was a very interesting thread regarding the theodolite tracking of the White Sands UFO in your linked article & some of the technical issues involved with the use of a theodolite for such a purpose.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not



posted on May, 16 2010 @ 10:49 AM
link   
reply to post by Maybe...maybe not
 


yes i was already aware of that thread but good to link to for others who haven't seen it. the report i quoted was a visual sighting and the issue about triangulation is irrelevant to the point being made.



in my opinion, Jacobs is honestly telling us what he experienced and the criticism he has received over the years from people like Klass for coming forward with the story is just plain sad. this case does deal with a sensitive subject so attempts at distorting the truth should be expected, however, the people who have seen the real deal like myself know that what Robert Jacobs is telling us is not only possible but most likely probable. there is evidence that UFO's are watching or observing human War technology and the question we should be asking is, why are they interested ?








new topics

top topics



 
13
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join