UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2008 > May > May 28

Re: MoD File Release

From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
Date: Wed, 28 May 2008 20:49:38 -0300
Archived: Wed, 28 May 2008 23:47:52 -0400
Subject: Re: MoD File Release


>From: Joe McGonagle <joe.mcgonagle.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Wed, 28 May 2008 13:57:19 +0100
>Subject: Re: MoD File Release

>>From: Brad SSparks <RB47x.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Wed, 28 May 2008 03:22:44 EDT
>>Subject: Re: MoD File Release

><snip>

>>Access to what "raw" data? Garbage? This is the fatal flaw in
>>all futile efforts to follow a paper trail to find some
>>conspiracy agency or conversely to argue there is no paper trail
>>and no secret UFO agency. You're both wrong. No one wants your
>>garbage UFO cases from housewives and truck drivers, when they
>>have billion-dollar classified global sensor systems to rely on
>>instead.

>Well how about a report, with radar contact, by a Vulcan nuclear
>bomber crew? I know you are familiar with this case through Dave
>Clarke. Or else, how about an instrumental report from Navy
>helicopter pilots, as was released in the current batch? There
>are many more examples, some already known about, and I am sure,
>some yet to be released.

>>This is the flawed "vacuum cleaner" methodology whereby every
>>scrap of info no matter how unreliable is collected in some
>>futile hope that someone can extract a gawdalmighty "pattern"
>>from it.

>You seem to be saying that the data is worthless. I disagree.
>It is valuable at the very least in order to evaluate what
>generates IFOs, what witness descriptions of IFOs are like, how
>accurate are estimates of time, height, size, direction etc in
>witness reports - especially 'expert' report - how fallible are
>the operators composing and sending the military signals. I have
>already identified a number with incorrect dates or times in the
>current release.

>People have been trying to get the government to make their
>files available for decades - well now they have, in the UK and
>some people just don't like what they see in them.

><snip>

>>So you can't expect to find a paper trail of anecdotal UFO
>>reports and follow it to some supersecret agency. They're not
>>interested, not because UFO's don't exist but because they don't
>>want worthless reports where witnesses can't tell if the UFO was
>>10 feet in size, or 100 feet, or 1 foot, or somewhere in
>>between, etc. And you can't use that lack of interest in non-
>>scientific non-instrumented UFO reports as proof of no interest
>>at all in the subject.

>I refer you again to the instrumented reports in the released
>- or due to be released - files. Why don't they count?

>Also, how do these instrumented reports reach the 'secret'
>department? Take the hypothetical example of Captain Igor
>Androvich, piloting his Ilyushin 96-300 from Moscow to Gatwick.
>Over Kent, his collision avoidance system is triggered, he looks
>outside and sees a missile-shaped object passing 100 feet from
>his aircraft. Does he think 'I'd better not report this through
>normal channels, I had better use the MoD secret channel'?

Boy, Joe... you have really mixed together a desperate
hypothetical here.

Can I ask the following questions?

Why a Russian pilot/aircraft over Kent?

Why a missile shaped object?

Why a TCAS alert?

I get your point when you question who he should report it to.
My guess is his own people when he got home as well at CAA's ATC
sector controlling airspace over Kent and at the time it
happened. If some 'interested' agency in the UK wanted to get
involved then it would happen after the fact and quietly I
suspect. But I tke your point re. the budget restrictions. Same
apply here.

Your example BTW sounds not-hypothetical.

A missile - if it was a missile - is unlikely to trigger TCAS.
But you mentioned missile shaped so back to UFO. I have a
personal interest in TCAS alerts and they seem to trigger TCAS
often. Was there a resolution advisory in your hypothetical?

Does the CAA have compulsory daily incident reports involving UK
carriers? Such incident reports cover everything from bird
strikes to toilet failures on airliners, not just reports of
anomalies. But they show up too here in Canada's compulsory
daily incident reports. The US doesn't have a federal
requirement in this area. It is a voluntary thing.

To respond to your response to my response a couple of days
ago...

I don't believe that you can know all of what the MOD or RAF
knows about this phenomenon. _But_, like other country's
intelligence gatherers and black ops agencies that is probably
not much when it comes down to it.

If they do know something it is likely performance figures,
interception ability of of ours verses theirs  - which is
embarrassing to us - that there are certain side effects to be
considered and perhaps avoided. My real concern is their effect
on civilian carriers and private aircraft.


Don Ledger



Listen to 'Strange Days... Indeed' - The PodCast

See:

http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/sdi/program/subscribers/


[ 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