UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2004 > Feb > Feb 7

Re: Whittlesea Australia UFO Photograph - Hatch

From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul>
Date: Sat, 07 Feb 2004 06:12:10 -0800
Fwd Date: Sat, 07 Feb 2004 09:45:01 -0500
Subject: Re: Whittlesea Australia UFO Photograph - Hatch

>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2004 13:49:08 -0500
>Subject: Re: Whittlesea Australia UFO Photograph


>>Getting some kind of read on size, distance and speed is
>>paramount to our ability to determine if it is a 'bird' or a
>>'fly' that was captured in mid-flight.

>Knowing the distance is very important, obviously. Unfortunately
>even if we knew exact distances to all the known objects in the
>photo that wouldn't help us determine the distance to the UO
>(unknown object). If we knew, a priori, some information about
>the object (such as its size!) we could determine the distance.
>In a rare case (McMinnville photos) the photographic information
>was sufficient to provide a distance estimate based on
>atmospheric attenuation and scatering of light. Unfortunately
>the image conditions that pertained to the (first) McMinnville
>photo do not occur here. HAD THERE BEEN VISUAL WITNESSES.... we
>might be in a better position to estimate distance. If, for
>example someone had said "it went behind the telephone pole"...
>well, then we would know it wasn't a bug. And so on.

>*Amy: You keep saying that 'some people have identified the
>object as a flying saucer' which isn't true.


Hello Bruce, John, Diane and all:

I'm still trying to fix the position of the Sun, believe it or
not, with respect to the objects in the famous photo.

Diane has it on good authority that the cameraman was facing
West. Now, I don't expect that to be _exactly_ west, within a
few degrees of due west.

Dan Bright (zaziork.com) and I finally agreed on approximate Sun
angle of 288 degrees azimuth (18 degrees North of due West) and
an altitude of about 55 degrees above the horizon.

Please see Dan's images here, they look pretty good:


Ignoring the 'UFO' for a moment, please look for clues to the
position of the Sun on the objects in the field of vision.

1) IF we are looking West here, then the Sun must be above the
field of vision, or else it would show, possibly 'blinding' the
camera so nothing else shows!

2) From the silvery box-on-a-box at far left, the one with the
top almost flush with the horizon (ridge), reflections and
shadows are consistent with the Sun angles and the "cameraman
facing generally West."

3) Notice that the front faces of the railway crossing X-signs
are dark, indicating the Sun was behind them

4) The lit red lights indicate a train just passed or is just
about to pass.

5) Other reflections from rounded surfaces, the top of the RR
crossing sign at left, the lower RH insulator on the tall power
transmission crossbar on the power pole .. agree with the Sun
being above the field of view, and somewhat to the right of
center for this photo.

Bruce: do you agree? If so, what does that tell us about the
'ufo'? My original impression, assuming the shape of a classic
flying saucer, was that the Sun was somewhat behind the

Now it seems to be in front of him, and off to the right, and
high enough (55 degrees elevation) to stay out of the photo. IF
the Sun were behind the photographer, we should be able to see
the fronts of the RR crossing X-signs etc.

Given that, the classic saucer image I had pictured starts to
weaken. Somehow I cannot see a 'bird' in all this, but some sort
of flying insect becomes all the more plausible.

If that has any merit, what I thought were reflections from a
rounded saucer surface might indeed be the semi-transparent
wings of an insect.

The only problem with that, is the wings seem much to far to one
end of the body, in this case to the right. Most insects I know,
respectable ones at least, keep their wings pretty much in the
middle to balance their bodily center of mass.

Unless something better comes in, I'm gonna have to derate this
case as a probable mis-identification of a natural object. If
that's right, I lean toward a bug rather than a bird. A bug is
much less likely to go unnoticed for one thing.

Diane: I would love to visit any Victorian pub which you may
recommend. Given the time and money, I'd go visit Australia at
the drop of a hat.

Best wishes

- Larry Hatch

[ 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