UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2002 > Jun > Jun 19

Re: Blimps - Ledger

From: Don Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca>
Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2002 19:11:39 -0300
Fwd Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 21:17:46 -0400
Subject: Re: Blimps - Ledger

 >From: Jan Aldrich <project1947@earthlink.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2002 10:23:57 -0400
 >Subject: Re: Blimps

 >>From: Paul Novak <nib68@yahoo.com>
 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 16:07:28 -0700 (PDT)
 >>Subject: Re: Blimps

 >>>From: Alfred Lehmberg <Lehmberg@snowhill.com>
 >>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
 >>>Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 08:02:55 -0500
 >>>Subject: Re: Blimps


 >>However, Japan did use balloon bombs called Fugos. They were
 >>fueled with hydrogen, not helium, and carried antipersonel and
 >>incendiary bombs.


 >Fugos were a much later development toward the end of the war.

 >The Battle of Los Angeles is a very complicated and still
 >mysterious incident. The comments here so far haven't even
 >scratched the surface.

 >There was not just one object involved in the incident. Multiple
 >objects were involved.

 >The famous picture is another feature of the sighting apparently
 >unrelated to a third feature, a meteorological balloon.

 >Witnesses talk about multiple objects over Los Angeles. At the
 >same time there appears to be a large object moving up and down
 >Southern California, the picture about which everyone is
 >commenting. And finally, the Anti Aircraft Artillery had
 >previously released a meteorological balloon which the AAA
 >thought accounted for the target they fired on.

 >All official and press accounts are confusing and do not give a
 >clear picture about what occurred.

 >The incident starts off with the Navy giving the alert. (How did
 >the Navy know something was up? Radar? Observations from picket
 >ships? None of this is clear.)

 >The Japanese did have aircraft which could be launched from
 >submarines. One such craft bombed Oregon during the same time

 >Large amounts of ammo were expended against the object in the
 >photograph. These were the day before the proximity fuse, so a
 >direct hit or hit by flak dispersed at pre-determined altitudes
 >was necessary. In the case of a balloon penetration should have
 >brought it down.

 >Since the incident was so close to Pearl Harbor, official
 >probably obscured the reports of this event. The Army and the
 >Navy publicly disagreed on the extent and importance of the

Hi Jan,

I asked this question earlier on this thread. So far-no answer:

Wasn't someone killed downrange somewhere due to spent triple-A?


Don ledger

[ Next Message | Previous Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |

UFO UpDates Main Index

UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp

Archive programming by Glenn Campbell at Glenn-Campbell.com