UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2004 > May > May 18

Re: 2004 Mexico UFO Case Crew Interviews - Maccabee

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul>
Date: Tue, 18 May 2004 12:12:31 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 18 May 2004 17:02:35 -0400
Subject: Re: 2004 Mexico UFO Case Crew Interviews - Maccabee


>From: Santiago Yturria <syturria.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Mon, 17 May 2004 11:24:02 -0500
>Subject: 2004 Mexico UFO Case Crew Interviews


>These are transcript excerpts from the interviews with three
>crew members directly involved in the Mexican Air Force C26A
>plane incident on March 5, 2004 - conducted by researcher Jaime
>Maussan as part of the investigation in April 2004.

>The crew members are Major Magdaleno Castanon - flight commander
>& pilot of the aircraft. Lt. German Ramirez Marin - Radar
>Operator, and Lt. Mario Adrian Velasquez Telles - FLIR Operator.

---

>Interview with Major Magdaleno Castanon - Pilot.

>Question: Major, did you feel worried at any time when you
>realized you were surrounded by these unknown lights?

>Answer: According to the information I heard from the operations
>co-ordinator chief - he was in charge of the visual operation on
>he screens - he mentioned that the objects were in the back, on
>the left side and in front of us. It was at that moment that I
>began to feel stressed.

NOTE: from information below, there were 3 radar targets, one in
front, one to th right of in front and one behind. There were
also several IR images, all on the left side.

<snip>

>Question: Would you say that the objects were invisible to
>normal sight?

>Answer: I would say so because none of the crew could see them
>with simple eyesight.

>Question: At that distance, where the objects were from you,
>wouldn't you have been able to see them?

>Answer: The closest distance that we had from the objects was 2
>miles. Our experience tells us that we can identify conventional
>aircraft at that distance, so that's the doubt that operation
>left on us.

<snip>

>Question: At the beginning of the incident, was it possible
>these objects became aware that you were following them?

>Answer: It's just a guess, but perhaps there was a connection,
>in that sense, because it is very strange that we first pursued
>them, but when we cancelled that and made a completely opposite
>turn te objects then also turned - but in OUR direction and
>began following us. I think it could be posible that in some way
>these objects were aware that we had been following and
>observing them.

NOTE: the above comment about making a "completely opposite
turn" suggests that the plane was initially flying westward as
it headed toward the first object it detect (initial detection
at 37 miles, approach to about 2 miles, then the object "took
off"). After the turn, and during the time of FLIR imagery, the
plane was flying almost due east.


<snip>

---

>Interview with Lieutenant German Ramirez Marin. (non-FLIR) radar
>operator.

>Question: When was the first time you became aware of the
>objects.

>Answer: When we made a turn to route ourselves to Campeche, the
>FLIR infrared camera operator detected a target without a shape,
>just a shine. The target continued being observed with the FLIR.
>Then we detected other targets at the left side of the plane.
>They were eleven targets. We never had visual contact with them.

NOTE: this seems to refer to the turn after the initial chase
(37 miles to 2 miles)

>Question: The eleven targets appeared on the normal (non-
>infrared) radar?

>Answer. No. The eleven targets were not detected on the radar
>screen. Initially, only one target was detected by the radar.

NOTE: does this refer to the initial target (37 miles to 2 miles)?
Naturally the plane would have been flying toward the initial
radar target (thinking it was an airplane) so that would put the
initial target at 12:00 (straight ahead).
Was there a radar target straight ahead after the "turn" and
during the IR imagery?  It seems so.

>Then another target appeared at one o'clock, that's how we
>describe the position that is in front but slightly to our
>right. And then a third one in back of the plane. Those were the
>only three targets that appeared in the radar screen during the
>incident. The other ones that were at nine 'o clock, on our left
>side never appeared on the radar.

NOTE: in the abov he he apparently talking about the situation
while the FLIR system was showing "lights" at the left of the
plane. The lights at the left were not detected by the radar,
which was continually scanning 360 degrees around the airplane.
Th FLIR pointing direction was controlled by the operator who
apparently never (?) scanned al the way around (at least no
report of that yet).

>Question: There was a time when these objects surrounded you.

>Answer: Yes, we can assume that because we had information of a
>target in the front, another one slightly to the right, one in
>the back, and according to the FLIR several others on our left
>side. So, we assumed that we were surrounded.

Note: radar says target at 12:00, target at 1:00 target and one
at (about) 6:00 (behind) relative to straight ahead (12:00).
FLIR says multiple objects at the left. No statement about a
FLIR search for objects ahead or at the right or behind.

<snip>

>Question: The objects movements on the radar were out of the
>ordinary?

>Answer: Certainly. Our data information - most of all, the icons
>(blips), the clusters - were always there on the screen, but the
>information on their movements was constantly changing. Their
>speed changes were sudden, 60 -120- 300 knots, according to the
>radar information.

NOTE: this is important information not presented in the initial
report (at least not translated).  The radar has the capability
through the Doppler effect of "instantly" measuring the speed of
an object. However, the measurement is only made once every 10
seconds (the rotation rate of the radar). Nevertheless, to
change speed as indicated above in 10 seconds would be
anomalous. And, in fact, the report of rapid speed changes adds
evern more to the unexplained aspect of this sighting.

>The same happened with their flight paths. The courses showed 90
>degrees at first then, suddenly, 130 degrees on the radar
>screen.

>Question: What does that mean?

>Answer: It means that the target changed direction constantly
>at great speed. There is no aircraft that can perform such
>direction changes so quickly.

NOTE: yet another reason for unexplained:


---

>Interview with Lieutenant Mario Adrian Velazquez Tellez. FLIR
>operator.

>Question: Is it possible that the FLIR gave false information?

>Answer: It is not posible. This was visual information of a
>target that had both heat and movement, so it would not make
>reference to something that was not there.

NOTE: The FLIR system is designed to respond only to radiation
in the range 3.6-5 microns. There is no reason to expect it to
create images of anything other than sources of 3.6-5 micron
electroagnetic radiation.

Question: Does the FLIR register hot air?

>Answer: No. FLIR doesn't register hot air, it registers an
>object that generates heat.

The FLIR cannot "see" the hot gasses coming out of an engine. It
can see the warm r hot engine body, however.

>Question: Then the eleven objects that were detected by the FLIR
>were generating heat. Were these objects there even though you
>couldn't see them with your eyes?

>Answer: They were there, and we have the data references by
>their positions. They were on our left side, at the same
>laltitude and the same speed.

NOTE: the interview does not say whether or not the FLIR
operator rotated the FLIR sensor to scan in all directions. It
would certainly seem natural that he would do that, but it would
be nice to see a statement to that effect. In particular, it
would be nice to know whether or not the FLIR system picked up a
target at 12:00, one at 1:00 and one at 6:00.

>Question: How much heat were the objects generating?

>Answer. We ran several measurements trying to get an image and
>all the time the targets registered very hot. We never found any
>irregular shape, they were spherical all the time.

NOTE: what experiments?

>Question: Is this type of shape irregular with respect to other
>aircraft you have detected before?

>Answer: Yes, it was an irregular shape. I know of nothing like
.the aircraft I saw.

NOTE: for a typical airplane at several miles distance the FLIR
system could show an image that has the shape of an airplane
with very "hot spots" at the locations of the engines

>Question: In your experience do you have any previous personal
>knowledge of any similar incident like this?

>Answer: I have never experienced anything like this and I don't
>know what to tell you. I don't have any explanation for what
t>hese objects were.

>Question: You had detection with both radar and FLIR?

>Answer. Correct. The radar gave us positions and then with the
>FLIR we searched that area. We located the targets and we kept
>those targets on screen while the radar was detecting other
>targets, giving us more positions. We tried to keep all the
>targets on screen all the time, so as not to lose them.

NOTE: the radar and FLIR was "coupled" in such a way that the
radar would give target direction to the FLIR and then the
operator could scan back and forth relative to that direction to
search for a target. Typically he would look for the heated
engines of an airplane.  Evidently the FLIR operator found the
large number of objects at the left but it is necessary to know
whether or not he pointed the FLIR in any other direction and, i
particular whether or not he got images in the directions of the
radar targets during the time of being "surrounded."

>Question: How did the objects surround the airplane?

>Answer: The radar had objects on the front, slighlty to the
>right and on the back. The FLIR had several objects on the left
>so we could say that we were surrounded.

>Question: Were the objects big in size?

>Answer: They were big, especially two of them that were closer
>to us.

Can't really say much about size except that if the objects were
2 miles away the infrared light sources couldn't have been
larger than the diameter of the bright circular image projected
to 2 miles, i.e., they were smaller than about 7 ft. (This
refers to the two very bright lights side by side, separated by
about 17 ft).

>Question: Could FLIR have created this - is it posible to
>manipulate the FLIR information?

>Answer: No. It is not posible to load information into the FLIR.
>All the information the FLIR detects is out there and is really
>happening. And the FLIR records this information in real time.

NOTE: Both the FLIR system and the radar system had tape
recorders. Apparently on the FLIR system was actually recording
'the events. Of course, the air traffic control also had a tape
and maybe the airplane cockpit recorder.




[ 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