Book: "Triangular UFOs - An Estimate of the Situation"

a reply to: Jonjonj

Im guessing this is best explanation for the Belgium wave outside of an ET craft.

But why would the US or any ally country be operating a craft like this over Belgium without first clearing it with them? Even if it was cleared, why test it over this country?

Video about the wave and the UFO capability from De Brouwer



Unsolved Mysteries coverage

I am currently around halfway through this book, and all I can say is that we must have some pretty advanced technology at our disposal if we can build vehicles that are capable of some of the manouevres reported, and in almost complete silence. I note that many of these reports are by multiple police officers, and they seem to be very clear observations of structured triangular craft (ie. not indistinct blobs or points of light). Very interesting indeed.

a reply to: 111DPKING111

Could have been multiple reasons. A possible theory I have is that this was a diversion for the later use of the F117 in the Gulf war. In landing mode they have the same triangular lights with the red strobe in between. If you cause 'panic' in Europe with some simular visual characteristics, this could win you a couple of minutes in a real war situation when dealing with 'a believer'.

I'm also not convinced the Belgian UFO wave was one type of aircraft but might as well been multiple craft each with different flight characteristics.

Also, back then Belgium was reducing the size of it's airforce, so this could have been a test of capabilities or reaction speed.

Not mentioned often is the small ufo wave over Belgium in I believe 1997. When watching the Hale-Bob comet with my brother we witnessed the famous Belgian triangle ufo. It didn't look 'out of this world' to me, but the low altitude, slow speed and lack of sound made it look out of place, almost eery. It also had 2 small red strobes on the back when seeing it from behind.

Still wonder what it was to this day, that's why I'm here...

originally posted by: zeroPointOneQ
a reply to: 111DPKING111

Could have been multiple reasons. A possible theory I have is that this was a diversion for the later use of the F117 in the Gulf war. In landing mode they have the same triangular lights with the red strobe in between. If you cause 'panic' in Europe with some simular visual characteristics, this could win you a couple of minutes in a real war situation when dealing with 'a believer'.

Im not sure I completely follow, but NATO/US would gain air superiority fairly quickly with anyone in a conventional war. No need for any tricks, and I doubt any country would think UFO if they saw a triangle craft if they were knowingly engaged with the US. And really, any pilot is going to shoot first and ask questions later during wartime.

This isnt a slam dunk, maybe we had some really unbelievable craft in our fleet by 89(I dont think we had anything this cool), but I really cant fathom a good reason for test flying this over an ally country without telling them.

I'm also not convinced the Belgian UFO wave was one type of aircraft but might as well been multiple craft each with different flight characteristics.

I am most familiar with the Eupen siting which had multiple officers at different locations track it(for over an hour) with the same exact description(its the siting in the video I posted, the actual officers are talking us through it). The last set of officers who witness the object take off at high speeds had this say.

Taken from cohenufo.org

La Calamine: Approximately six minutes later, two other police officers encountered a similar object eight miles to the North in La Calamine. (small village) They saw the object floating over a building. "Then another object was leaving the main object. It was a red light, pulsating and descending vertically from the object. It moved around the building." Then, incredibly, "the three lights at the corner of the platform shrank inwards so that the whole thing became a single circle of light and shot off into the distance faster than the eye could follow."

It appears the object in question could change shape.

Also, back then Belgium was reducing the size of it's airforce, so this could have been a test of capabilities or reaction speed.

Maybe Im wrong, but I seriously doubt this was Belgium tech.

a reply to: 111DPKING111

Thanks for these arguments.

I wasn't implying Belgian tech. Now that would be a big surprise! I meant a test of how we would react to something 'unknown'.

This theory (one of the many I have) may not sound rational, I'm aware ... but do we really know how far other countries would go to gain an extra edge or keep things secret?

Maybe it was something else, but maybe it wasn't. That's why I like to challenge these kind of things.

And yes, I find the testemonies of the craft appearing to pick up water above a lake and other things pointed out by the witnesses truly bizar.

Just, when I witnessed it myself I didn't see anything of that exotic nature. Bit of a shame...

originally posted by: BASSPLYR
a reply to: Royweeezy

Interesting sighting. Its possible that the three triangles weren't literally connected but that one was slightly higher than the other (the front one) giving off the appearance of them being connected.

As for three in formation. The triangle its self has a strong field rotating around it in a clockwise motion. At the perimeter of this field there is a natural counter rotation. Kinda like a pair of gears. If two triangles were to get too close then that counter rotation between the two of them will make them spin around each other out of control. Like binary stars orbiting around a common point in between the two. Think of this counter rotation like a virtual gear. Picture two triangles one on the left the otger on the right. They are both spining clockwise. In between the two in the middle will be the.counter rotation spining counter clockwise.

However, take three triangles and put them in a triangular formation as if each were sharing this counter rotation in the middle they all lock in place preventing and spinning of the vehicles or linked vehicles.

So if they are going to fly them in close formation (probably because its the most efficient way for them to travel in packs) they will need three in a triangular formation. Or in groups of threes to maibtain that triangular symmetry to neitralize the counter rotation.

Same reason triangle ufos have three lights or drives. They used to just bevsaycers. But discs have one field rotating clockwise while the counter rotation makes the disc unstable and spin like a top. So, three drives in triangular formation to keep them stable and not spinning. One of the reasons the vehicles evolved from singular drives enclosed in a disc and triangular shaped.

It works both ways with a disc I think, the shape is good for stability like a spinning top and the torque is easily sorted if the mass is accelerating it self like this Huges XH-17's rotor blades.

a reply to: 111DPKING111

* Not everybody in the Belgian government would be cleared for that sort of disclosure. Probably only the top level of NATO.

* They wanted to see in a live demo honest reactions and judge how good the ECM and other systems were.

* It wasn't testing, it was a demonstration. There were People Looking. Who lived in a place colder than Belgium.

originally posted by: zeroPointOneQ
a reply to: 111DPKING111

Could have been multiple reasons. A possible theory I have is that this was a diversion for the later use of the F117 in the Gulf war. In landing mode they have the same triangular lights with the red strobe in between. If you cause 'panic' in Europe with some simular visual characteristics, this could win you a couple of minutes in a real war situation when dealing with 'a believer'.

Exactly! The final frontier: cognitive stealth!

I've always thought that people are too credulous, over interpret unreliable witness reports, and don't truly think about other outcomes---they're too attached to a certain narrative.

If one were given a task to "make a craft which appeared to do weird things", then certainly at night, it could easily be accomplished.

You don't think some think tank of DARPA or JASON's hadn't considered this before? It goes back well to the massive deceptions before Operation Overlord in 1944.

If I were running a comprehensive air defense/attack strategy I would certainly investigate the feasibility.

Not mentioned often is the small ufo wave over Belgium in I believe 1997. When watching the Hale-Bob comet with my brother we witnessed the famous Belgian triangle ufo. It didn't look 'out of this world' to me, but the low altitude, slow speed and lack of sound made it look out of place, almost eery. It also had 2 small red strobes on the back when seeing it from behind.

Still wonder what it was to this day, that's why I'm here...

That could be a completely different device for a different purpose. I'm guessing a replacement for helicopters in certain special forces & intelligence missions.

a reply to: BASSPLYR

I think that it's more likely to be a single craft with some electrochromic active illumination (optical stealth) which could give the appearance of more than one. They're testing how well they could operate on a bright moon night instead of the preferred dark/no moon night.

Seeing it as 3 craft means that it wasn't working all that great, or perhaps the ground target designated for maximum effect (they may have to optimize the algorithms for expected location of most important adversary) was somewhere else.

Hey, could you PM me? I've gotten no PM's since March, not sure if it is working or not.

a reply to: mbkennel

Pm sent!

Cognitive stealth. I like that term. I wanna call whatever I saw back in '14. Cognitive optical cloaking or something.

"Wasnt working so well"

Got that right, especially if you were having an inner ear issue at the time disrupting your otherwise normal senses.

Dont know if I told you that part of the story yet. Ill tell you via pm if I havent already.

originally posted by: KellyPrettyBear
According to this book, the first triangular 'ufo' sighting occurred in the late 1800's, well before the first flight at Kittyhawk.

I guess that rules out black ops military aircraft.. unless the military is several hundreds of years ahead of the rest of us in technology.

I guess if you just want to take some unverifiable story as gospel.

originally posted by: mbkennel
a reply to: 111DPKING111

* Not everybody in the Belgian government would be cleared for that sort of disclosure. Probably only the top level of NATO.

I can see this sorta, I do think someone along the way would have informed De Brouwer there was something going on that was above his clearance and not to pursue it. What kind of political nightmare would have ensued if one was shot down?

* They wanted to see in a live demo honest reactions and judge how good the ECM and other systems were.

There were plenty of UFO sightings by this time, public reaction is across the board. Any system testing could have been done over restricted airspace, military has tons of it.

And strange still that 35 years later, this craft is still secret.

* It wasn't testing, it was a demonstration. There were People Looking. Who lived in a place colder than Belgium.

Russia knew we were way ahead of them and they were on the decline.

a reply to: 111DPKING111

But why would the US or any ally country be operating a craft like this over Belgium without first clearing it with them? Even if it was cleared, why test it over this country?

The US had an invested interest in creating the UFO mythology in other European nations for sole purpose of manipulation. Take the crafts over foreign airspace, spook the civilians, create a modern mythology and then use that mythology to spy on other nations and or manipulate them on a social level.

a reply to: ColdWisdom

then use that mythology to spy on other nations

We had been doing it for decades with the U2 and Blackbird.

and or manipulate them on a social level.

How was this wave going to do that? There were already many tales of UFOs by 89, why create one more?

And what if we do engage Russia in war, I dont think the ICBMs are going care about this mythos.

a reply to: 111DPKING111

The threat of nuclear disaster is irrelevant to the mythos. They use it to infiltrate occult orders and such.

I mean... I guess ICBMs would be a problem but...

originally posted by: ColdWisdom
a reply to: 111DPKING111

The threat of nuclear disaster is irrelevant to the mythos. They use it to infiltrate occult orders and such.

I mean... I guess ICBMs would be a problem but...

It is quite fascinating to me, that occult groups have been infiltrated by governments since the very beginning of occult groups, and that (presumably) it continues to this very day.

That's a whole lot of sustained effort for very dubious returns on investment (one would think).

Now, granted, memes of any kind can be very 'dangerous', especially ones based on religion, spirituality and "the occult" not to mention "UFOs" which really fall into those same categories, as "UFOs" do not actually exist in the same way that other things exist. (IMHO).

Kev

a reply to: mbkennel

What missions under what branch could use THAT?
Cherry pick DELTA members?

originally posted by: 111DPKING111
a reply to: Jonjonj

Im guessing this is best explanation for the Belgium wave outside of an ET craft.

But why would the US or any ally country be operating a craft like this over Belgium without first clearing it with them?

Maybe it was, through NATO channels, but almost everybody in Belgium would have no need to know, including civilian ATC.

Perhaps it was an observability, ECM "live" test.

a reply to: cavtrooper7

I think there are multiple potential platforms and missions and the sightings are a mish mash of all of them.

Special Forces logistics/Airborne rescue would be an obvious one for something that can fly low and very stealthy. Something less obvious and less vulnerable than helicopters.

Others may be low-level tactical bombing, e.g. F-111 replacement in a stealth era.

yet others may be mid-or-high level recon or stealthy JSTARS type of missions. E.g. The Companion to the F-117. Think how the A-6 and F-111 and F-15E were/are two-seaters, but F-117 and now the F-35 are one seaters. Lots of work to fly and acquire and engage targets. Who is doing the other work?

And others are testbeds for future technologies.

a reply to: mbkennel

NO that wouldn't carry ANYTHING like line troops,maybe a detachment from SAD or ISA.