Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Best evidence for ET visitation - 3rd edition


Hazzard

Recommended Posts

Jet Chase Over Brazil

Summary:

As many as twenty UFOs were seen and tracked by ground radar and at least six airplanes. Unidentified radar returns were tracked by airports in São Paulo and the Integrated Air Defense & Air Traffic Control Center (CINDACTA) in Brasilia. Two F-5E and three Mirage jet fighters were scrambled from Santa Cruz AFB in Sao Paulo State, and Anápolis AFB in Goias State.

The case was discussed openly by high ranking government officials. It was first reported by Colonel (Ret.) Ozires Silva, president of the state-owned oil company Petrobrás, who was flying on an executive Xingu jet, when he and the pilot saw and pursued unidentified objects for about 25 minutes. The incident was covered widely in the Brazilian media, leading to a press conference at the Ministry of Aeronautics in Brasilia on May 23, with air traffic controllers and air force pilots involved in the scramble mission.

The Minister of Aeronautics, Brigadier General Otávio Moreira Lima, was very outspoken:

"Between 20:00 hrs. (5/19) and 01:00 hrs. (5/20) at least 20 objects were detected by Brazilian radars. They saturated the radars and interrupted traffic in the area. Each time that radar detected unidentified objects, fighters took off for intercept. Radar detects only solid metallic bodies and heavy (mass) clouds. There were no clouds nor conventional aircraft in the region. The sky was clear. Radar doesn't have optical illusions.

"We can only give technical explanations and we don't have them. It would be very difficult for us to talk about the hypothesis of an electronic war. It's very remote and it's not the case here in Brazil. It's fantastic. The signals on the radar were quite clear."112

The Minister also announced that a commission would study the incident. Air Force Major Ney Cerqueira, in charge of the Air Defense Operations Center (CODA), was equally candid:

My link

Edited by skyeagle409
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok. Well the directors had to get slant range data from an external source in order to operate. Before RADAR Optical Height Finders provided that data to the directors via electronic signals through a cable. Now RADAR in part stands for Ranging and the SCR-268 could 'range' a target well before it would be visible, so by using this existing system that existed between the Optical Height Finder and the Director before RADAR was even invented, the RADAR would be plugged into the director via the same type of cable to provide the slant range data just like the height finder. No different. The RADAR is just doing the job of the height finder.

That's not 'gun-laying', yet. Only when the RADAR was used to provide the azimuth and elevation data plus the slant range data through the director's computer, without a director crew using the director to track a target visually was the SCR-268 considered 'gun-laying'.

Thanks for the reply and explanation lost_shaman. Apologies for the delay in responding, but I wanted to verify some information before I answered and that led to a lot of reading. Fascinating stuff actually, although most would probably find it boring.

The short version...

It looks like you're probably right about SCR-268 RADAR units supplying the same data that height finders previously provided for this event. I haven't found confirmation that it was definitely implemented in LA at the time, but I don't see any reason to think otherwise after all the reading I've done the last few days.

The long version... (hidden with spoiler tag cuz... well... it is a little long... and people have been complaining about techno babble.)

As I mentioned, I've read through a lot of material in the last few days. More than necessary, I think, but I found the material rather interesting. Just in case you (or anyone else) would like to see any of this as well, I thought I'd add some source material for general perusal.

The links already provided from antiaircraft.org should be more than enough for a casual understanding of the technology of the time. Here is the index for that source. http://www.antiaircraft.org/radarindex.htm

In addition to that, I've looked through the following sources. I haven't read them all in full, but a few of them drew me in for some reason or another. Rather than take a lot of time to break it down and organize it, here are the rough notes I kept as I was looking through everything. Considering that the explanations you've given appear to me to be right on the money, not much point in explaining why the stuff in this source material backs that up as far as I've seen. But here's a pretty picture at least... :)

elec-09-1945-scr-270-fig3-i.jpg

Clearly the SCR-268 is simultaneously feeding searchlights and the AA gun director.

(you'll see this link down lower too I think, as part of my notes)

Disorganized jumble of stuff to follow... Sorry if it doesn't make sense to anyone but me. But just in case anyone else finds value in it, enjoy.

*****

Note

37th coast artillary brigade

*****

Books to possibly look up:

Between human and machine: feedback, control, and computing before cybernetics By David A. Mindell

Google Preview

http://books.google.com/books?id=Hc5NfBKdl_wC&printsec=frontcover&dq=Between+human+and+machine:+feedback,+control,+and+computing+before+cybernetics+By+David+A.+Mindell&source=bl&ots=UGe-xbTh-A&sig=fi5Sw1IbFcOu_TLQ8R4EYx0vHoM&hl=en&ei=8XeXTZStOIa6sAOuhuXLBQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CBQQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false

Pg 244 "This work led in 1937 to the SCR-268 radar..."

Pg 247 "Army SCR-268 fire control radar, the army's only fire control radar before the SCR-584."

Pg 249 "It requested only that Sperry connect its M-4 director to the SCR-268 radar, which the army already possessed in large numbers."

*****

Signal Corps the Emergency

(To December 1941)

http://www.scribd.com/doc/48283912/Signal-Corps-the-Emergency

399 Pgs

From Index:

AA Artillary

SCR-268 for: 255

and searchlight control radar: 88, 127

Radar SLC (searchlight control): 46, 88, 124, 172, 193, 199

SCR-268

for Coast Artillary: 46, 199, 255

height-indicator, feature of: 255

and WWII, role in: 127-28

secrecy: 122, 124, 172, 187, 198 (possible links to lost_shaman's points about secrecy)

*****

The Signal Corps, or The Signal Regiment

Director COL William Blair, first patent May 1937, mass production was SCR-268 and SCR-270

Air Defense Artillery (ADA)

Sperry M4 Director

*****

Source

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/policy/army/accp/ad0699/lesson1.htm

Radar Developments

In 1922, while Dr. A. Hoyt Talor and Leo Young of the Naval Research Laboratory were conducting a radio communication test, a boat passed between the transmitter and receiver. When this happened, it was noticed that the receiver signal was distinctly changed. This discovery was the beginning of further tests which eventually led to the development of the first US radars.

In May 1937, the Signal Corps demonstrated the SCR-268 prototype. This early radar was a mobile, short-range radio locator designed for controlling searchlights. Its objective was the rapid location of aircraft at night, giving range, elevation, and azimuth accurately enough for the coast artillery AA searchlights to pinpoint and illuminate the aircraft.

The SCR-268 (Figure 21) went into full production at the start of World War II and was used not only for searchlight control, but was also adapted to the role of a gun-laying radar.

*****

buy?

http://www.worthpoint.com/worthopedia/sperry-manuals-aircraft-anti-aircraft-4-in

Sperry Manuals, Aircraft & Anti Aircraft, 4 in all

TM 9-2655, Director, M-4 Bulletin 14-10A, Director M-7 Bulletin 14-20A, Power Control M-3 Gyropilot in Military Aircraft Technical Manual TM-9-2655, Instruction Guide Director, M4.

etc...

Check libraries, might be copies if needed.

*****

?

http://www.pdfgeni.com/book/sperry-mk-37--manual-pdf.html

*****

Interesting read.

http://web.mit.edu/STS.035/www/PDFs/sperry.pdf

The M4 series, standardized in 1939,

was similar to the M3 but abandoned the

constant altitude assumption and added an

altitude predictor for gliding targets. The

M7, standardized in 194 1, was essentially

similar to the M4 but added full power

control to the guns for automatic pointing

in elevation and azimuth [22]. These later

systems had eliminated errors to the point

where the greatest uncertainty was the

varying time it took different crews to

manually set the fuze and load the shell

into the gun. Automatic setters and loaders

did not improve the situation because of

reliability problems. The M7 model also

added provision for entering azimuth observation

from radio locator equipment,

prefiguring the addition of radar for target

observations. At the start of World War II,

the M7 was the primary anti-aircraft director

available to the army.

*****

?

http://books.google.com/books?id=T-IDAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA801&dq=m16+gun+data+computer&as_brr=1

*****

search

antiaircraft artillary field manual

*****

FM 4-125

Coast Artillery Field Manual, Antiaircraft Artillery Service of the Piece 3" Antiaircraft Gun

*****

FM 4-175 Anti Aircraft Artillary Operation 1942

http://www.docstoc.com/docs/53113872/FM-4-175-Anti-Aircraft-Artillery-Operation-1942

41. Sequence of Events (starts on page 29)

(d) Transfer of control from the detector (or locator) to the control station may be accomplished at any time by closing a switch located on the control station. (Page 62)

(3) Distant electric control M1942 - (a) Power motors on the searchlight are controlled by signals transmitted from synchronous repeaters (Selsyns) at the detector, locator, or control station to synchronous repeaters (Selsyns) located on the searchlight. (Page 62)

(Page 64) (60) Detector - a. A detector is...

It even has 4 pages of instructions for the demolition of the searchlight equipment in the event that a quick retreat is required. (Pages 118-121)

Appendix is on Pg 123 listing reference Field Manuals.

Index starts Pg 126.

Pg 141 Table III, Beam Diameters for Various Beam Spreads and Ranges (noting for lost_shaman who was asking about distance and size calculation data if I recall, in analysis of BOLA photo?)

Pg 145 has a foldout chart listing the duties of each operator staged by scenario.

strange no mention of SCR-268? Reason dif field manual? FM 4-176 Service of Radio Set SCR-268...

revisit.

*****

note

"The relationship to the Aircraft Warning Service and the ANtiaircraft Artillery Intelligence Service is also outlined in the same manual:

FM 4-105

*****

Hopeful to find...

"For a detailed description of a detector and technical explanation of its operation, see FM 4-145."

FM 4-145 Detector (SCR-268)

also see (Training Films?)

TF 4-609, 4-610 for description of orientation and synchronization of detector.

Many TF's referenced for SCR-268

TF 4-608 Part IV, Tracking targets.

TF 4-609 Part V, Orientation and synchronization with the searchlight.

TF 4-610 Part VI, Synchronization with the searchlight.

found none.

*****

Link with a lot of Field Manuals (but not FM 4-145)

http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USA/ref/FM/

FM 44-2, Employment of Antiaircraft Artillery Automatic Weapons

FM 44-4, Employment of Antiaircraft Artillery Guns

FM 4-104

etc...

lot of good reading, much from 1940. some not relevant for BOLA.... but interesting.

*****

FM 4-125, Service of the Piece 3-Inch Antiaircraft Gun

http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USA/ref/FM/PDFs/FM4-125.pdf

Very interesting details about manning, operating, upkeep, etc of the 3-Inch AA gun.

*****

FM 4-110, Operation of Director, M4, When Firing

http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USA/ref/FM/PDFs/FM4-110.pdf

388 pg PDF

Chapter 2. Position FInding, Fire Control, and Gunnery

Page 9, Figure 1. Capabilities of antiaircraft weapons.

lists 3" AA Gun with Altitude under 1000 yards and range just over 11000 yards.

Page 10, Fixed 3" AA Gun, muzzle velocity 2700, Horizontal range 11,100 yards, Vertical range 9800 yards, Rate of fire 25 rounds/minute.

Page 75:

77. DATA TRANSMISSION FOR ANTIAIRCRAFT BATTERIES.-Three sets of data must be supplied to an antiaircraft gun; elevation, azimuth, and fuze range. The mechanisms by which these data are determined are not pertinent to this section. It is sufficient to state that in the standard data computors, the three sets of data are supplied automatically and continuously, and that the gun is kept laid in azimuth and elevation by the matching of the mechanical gun indices with the data pointers. Similarly, the fuze setter is kept set by matching its mechanical fuze-setting index with the transmitted data indicated by the fuze setter receiver's pointer. The electrical transmission of altitude from the stereoscopic height finder and the target designating system (par. 39d) are also included in the system.

bummer, no detail about the mechanisms.

Chapter 3. Instruments and Accessories for Antiaircraft Guns

Section I. Directors

starts Pg 156

Nothing in here referencing use of SCR-268...

Granted, originally published 1940, but this is the (apparently?) ammended version published May 2, 1942. Surprised that it doesn't have anything about the RADAR, but perhaps was just intended for auxilliary training purposes in the event that the RADAR units went down.

Does have a ton of info on the M4 Director and supplementary data inputs circa 1940.

*****

FM 4-112 Gunnery, Fire Control, Position FInding, and Horizontal Fire, Antiaircraft Automatic Weapons

August 22, 1942

http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USA/ref/FM/PDFs/FM4-112.PDF

Doesn't really apply to question of M4 with 3" AA guns.

*****

SCR-268 wiki

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SCR-268

"The SCR-268 was not a particularly advanced design by the standards of the era. Early units were technically behind the times in terms of tracking in particular; while the SCR-268 was being introduced, the Germans were upgrading the Würzburg radar, first to use lobe switching, and finally to conical scan the next year. These sorts of changes were simply not possible on the SCR-268 due to its long wavelength, which demanded a non-circular antenna.

The only way to "fix" this problem was to move to a microwave radar of their own, an effort that started after the Tizard Mission. This led to the introduction of the SCR-584, which fit the entire radar system on a single trailer, added conical scanning, and was generally much more accurate and far easier to operate. SCR-268s were removed from service almost immediately with the ending of the war.

The SCR-268 was one of the first radar sets to use lobe switching of its receiving antennas as a means to locate AAA searchlight beams on aircraft. Since it did not lobe-switch its transmitted signal it would be classes as one of the first LORO radars."

decent source links.

*****

InfoAge pages on SCR-268

Contents page:

http://www.infoage.org/html/elec-1945-09-scr-270.html

Page 101:

http://www.infoage.org/html/elec-1945-09-p101-scr-270.html

Fig 3 - Simplified block diagram showing basic components of the equipment.

img

http://www.infoage.org/photos/elec-09-1945-scr-270-fig3-i.jpg

Shows simultaneous output to searchlight and gun director.

*****

Sperry and the M4/M7 Director

http://hagleylibrary.blogspot.com/2010/09/collection-highlights-sperry-gyroscope.html

brief, but possible additional leads for more info if needed.

For additional information about these items and to set up an appointment to view them at the Hagley Library (http://www.hagley.org/library/), please contact Max Moeller, Head of Imprints, at 302-658-2400 x226 or send email inquiries to Ask Hagley.

*****

del

So yeah, there ya go. :hmm:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

... and people have been complaining about techno babble.)

Sorry booN or anyone else, I wasn't actually complaining about the technical portion of the discussions. The devil is in the details and I think an in depth analysis of cases often brings about a better understanding of what transpired. It can get a little tedious on occasion though but I know it is in the hopes of explaining an incident so I don't mind. :tu:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry booN or anyone else, I wasn't actually complaining about the technical portion of the discussions. The devil is in the details and I think an in depth analysis of cases often brings about a better understanding of what transpired. It can get a little tedious on occasion though but I know it is in the hopes of explaining an incident so I don't mind. :tu:

I didn't take your post as a complaint S2F, but an assessment (and an accurate one at that!) in response to someone else. Others though have made it pretty clear that they are tired of some of the nitty gritty details. I can't blame anyone for that. I typically don't get into that much depth myself and strangely I can't explain why this particular set of details grabbed me like it did. But... it did. I couldn't stop reading even long after I'd confirmed that LS was on the money. Fascinating stuff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't take your post as a complaint S2F, but an assessment (and an accurate one at that!) in response to someone else. Others though have made it pretty clear that they are tired of some of the nitty gritty details. I can't blame anyone for that. I typically don't get into that much depth myself and strangely I can't explain why this particular set of details grabbed me like it did. But... it did. I couldn't stop reading even long after I'd confirmed that LS was on the money. Fascinating stuff.

Good on ya booN for asking!

I've found myself drawing triangles to get an understanding of how these AA systems might've worked. All the questions in my mind relate to trigonometry, so I've refrained from asking.

Props 2U booN :ty:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It wouldn't be completely useless if there were 1,000 Allied bombers flying at you at a known altitude. The Germans had stereoscopic range finders. This is called Barrage fire, and under the Germans circumstances it may have made sense to them.

Alright... and if your target disappears while still within range of your guns, and still apparently on course to your location, wouldn't it make sense to use that strategy as a "last ditch effort" if you will, to if nothing else try to get the target to change course, leave the area, do something other than continue trying to attack your location?

However, the point here is whether or not 'our' guns were aimed manually without the use of RADAR or 'Directors' in an AA capacity as you stated in the earlier post and I don't believe this would be the case. Yes, these guns could be manually aimed at ground targets, but the wouldn't be used that way in an AA capacity. The would still use the 'Directors' to produce Firing solutions for the Guns, if there was no RADAR then the 'Director' crew got their range data from a 'Height Finder'. Worst case, the 'Director' crew would guess at the range, but I don't believe the individual crews manning the guns themselves would be trying to manually aim at targets in an AA role. This is simply too complicated a task thus the need for the 'Directors' from the very begining when the guns were introduced.

I understand what you're saying, and perhaps I was using the term "manually" a little too liberally. That said, we do agree then that guns could be aimed by the Director without the benefit of a radar or a visual target in a "barrage fire" fashion by guessing at the range. And if it were coordinated in such a way that different emplacements were using different range estimates to set up a protective "umbrella" over their location(s), that would be a viable defense option, would it not?

Cz

Edited by Czero 101
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Er, sorry to be ignorant, but can we clarify exactly what all this "everything you ever wanted to know about the SCR-268 RADAR" is for; is it in order to prove that there must have been something in the sky over L.A., or is it just for the pure academic interest of it? :unsure2:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the reply and explanation lost_shaman. Apologies for the delay in responding, but I wanted to verify some information before I answered and that led to a lot of reading. Fascinating stuff actually, although most would probably find it boring.

The short version...

It looks like you're probably right about SCR-268 RADAR units supplying the same data that height finders previously provided for this event. I haven't found confirmation that it was definitely implemented in LA at the time, but I don't see any reason to think otherwise after all the reading I've done the last few days.

The only information regarding the -268's at the BOLA comes from the Unit History where it states that -268's were only used for searchlights and not for gunlaying, with the exception of Battery B of the 65th Coast Artillery.

In researching the 65th CA, I found some interesting things:

According to this organizational chart:

army_004_aa.gif

IMAGE SOURCE

The 65th Coastal Artillery Anti Aircraft Regiment was based at Camp Haan. Camp Haan was located at what is now the March Joint Air Reserve near Riverside, California, approximately 60 miles inland from the LA coast (SOURCE). It is possible, however, that Battery B was deployed closer to the coast, but so far I haven't been able to find anything confirming a location at that time. Some sources say San Diego, while others talk about various different locations.

Another interesting thing I found was a page from the "Skylighters" website. They have a page called "A Pictorial History of the Fourth Antiaircraft Command in World War II — Part I: Searchlights" with some great nighttime photos of searchlights in action.

These ones were of particular interest:

sldisplay11.jpg

The Los Angeles Coliseum is illuminated during a welcome

rally for American generals returning from the war.

sldisplay12.jpg

Los Angeles and the distant city of Long Beach lie spread out beneath the searchlight cone

thrown from the Hollywood Bowl during a U. S. Treasury Department bond show.

Notice how in these images, the searchlight beams stop at the cloud base and despite their apparent brightness, cannot be seen to continue past the cloud base.

Then there's this one:

sldisplay7.jpg

Searchlight beams strike the base of the cloud ceiling,

creating an effect resembling a flying disc.

Interesting, no...? :)

Cz

Edited by Czero 101
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Er, sorry to be ignorant, but can we clarify exactly what all this "everything you ever wanted to know about the SCR-268 RADAR" is for; is it in order to prove that there must have been something in the sky over L.A., or is it just for the pure academic interest of it? :unsure2:

I think its a little of both, actually, but from my perspective, its more to show that there didn't need to be anything in the sky for the AA guns to have been given the order to fire, or a target to shoot at.

Cz

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think its a little of both, actually, but from my perspective, its more to show that there didn't need to be anything in the sky for the AA guns to have been given the order to fire, or a target to shoot at.

Cz

Certainly those latest pictures you found are very interesting indeed, and do indeed answer a few questions, I think. Well done on finding them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only information regarding the -268's at the BOLA comes from the Unit History where it states that -268's were only used for searchlights and not for gunlaying, with the exception of Battery B of the 65th Coast Artillery.

In researching the 65th CA, I found some interesting things:

According to this organizational chart:

army_004_aa.gif

IMAGE SOURCE

The 65th Coastal Artillery Anti Aircraft Regiment was based at Camp Haan. Camp Haan was located at what is now the March Joint Air Reserve near Riverside, California, approximately 60 miles inland from the LA coast (SOURCE). It is possible, however, that Battery B was deployed closer to the coast, but so far I haven't been able to find anything confirming a location at that time. Some sources say San Diego, while others talk about various different locations.

Another interesting thing I found was a page from the "Skylighters" website. They have a page called "A Pictorial History of the Fourth Antiaircraft Command in World War II Part I: Searchlights" with some great nighttime photos of searchlights in action.

These ones were of particular interest:

sldisplay11.jpg

The Los Angeles Coliseum is illuminated during a welcome

rally for American generals returning from the war.

sldisplay12.jpg

Los Angeles and the distant city of Long Beach lie spread out beneath the searchlight cone

thrown from the Hollywood Bowl during a U. S. Treasury Department bond show.

Notice how in these images, the searchlight beams stop at the cloud base and despite their apparent brightness, cannot be seen to continue past the cloud base.

Then there's this one:

sldisplay7.jpg

Searchlight beams strike the base of the cloud ceiling,

creating an effect resembling a flying disc.

Interesting, no...? :)

Cz

Hey Cz, I am not sure if this post will work properly, but I have attached the link also, you need to scroll half way down.

Apologies for not responding to some of the posts but I have not been able to since Friday, although have quickly caught up. I will add responses later as I havent the time at the moment.

Anyhow, the link provided shows the analysis of the photo you posted from skylighters. Just thought I would throw this in the mix.

I will also provide the source for Kenneth R Martin as soon as I have the time to find it. :tu:

side by side comparison of the (original BOLA image - L) & (searchlight striking a cloud base image - R)

Enlarge this imageReduce this image Click to see fullsize...

so when comparing the enhancements of the "original" BOLA picture and the "searchlight striking a cloud base" picture we can see there is a distinct difference in the two images.

The possible object in the BOLA image appears to have a more defined outline or shape that would be reminiscent of a craft or UFO verses the anomaly in the "searchlight striking cloud" image which has a dis-organized appearance.

edit: oops forgot the link: http://magic-ufo.forum-phpbb.in/t1151-famous-battle-of-la-photo-was-retouched-version

and yes maybe one sided analysis going by websites name but still worth looking at.

Edited by quillius
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmm. Not wanting to be rude, but maybe we're seeing what we want to see? Those pictures of Cz's do look remarkably Mothership-like, I can't help thinking. :hmm:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good on ya booN for asking!

I've found myself drawing triangles to get an understanding of how these AA systems might've worked. All the questions in my mind relate to trigonometry, so I've refrained from asking.

Props 2U booN :ty:

Cheers mate, glad you enjoyed the information. FM 4-110, FM 4-111, and FM 4-112 were all pretty informative in that regard. The engineering behind the early AA guns completely blows my mind.

Er, sorry to be ignorant, but can we clarify exactly what all this "everything you ever wanted to know about the SCR-268 RADAR" is for; is it in order to prove that there must have been something in the sky over L.A., or is it just for the pure academic interest of it? :unsure2:

Well, it was a mixture of things for me, and it wasn't just about the RADAR. Primarily I wanted to fully understand how the technology worked both with and without the RADAR because I felt some assumptions were being made about the BOLA event that may not have been entirely accurate. But it didn't take long for the material itself to just draw me in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the reply and explanation lost_shaman. Apologies for the delay in responding, but I wanted to verify some information before I answered and that led to a lot of reading. Fascinating stuff actually, although most would probably find it boring.

Hey booN,

I can tell you have been reading quite a bit! Clearly there is no doubt about that.

Did you read my mind as well? How did you know I was interested in the 'beam spread' of the searchlights?! I don't even think I've ever said anything about that! :huh:

At any rate I agree, this is all very "Fascinating stuff"! Great post booN!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey booN,

I can tell you have been reading quite a bit! Clearly there is no doubt about that.

Did you read my mind as well? How did you know I was interested in the 'beam spread' of the searchlights?! I don't even think I've ever said anything about that! :huh:

At any rate I agree, this is all very "Fascinating stuff"! Great post booN!

I just thought you might be interested in the beam spread because of the analysis you were working on in post #1248. Either that or I'm living proof that psychic powers are real... :hmm::P

Cheers LS. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think its a little of both, actually, but from my perspective, its more to show that there didn't need to be anything in the sky for the AA guns to have been given the order to fire, or a target to shoot at.

Cz

Actually, there was something in the sky over LA that night. The gunners were tracking the object from Santa Monica to Long Beach, and then, back in the opposite dirrection where it was last seen heading back over the ocean from where it came.

Searchlights striking the base of clouds was no reason to fire, otherwise, they would be firing almost every night.

The only information regarding the -268's at the BOLA comes from the Unit History where it states that -268's were only used for searchlights and not for gunlaying, with the exception of Battery B of the 65th Coast Artillery.

In researching the 65th CA, I found some interesting things:

According to this organizational chart:

Resized to 84% (was 770 x 330) - Click image to enlargearmy_004_aa.gif

IMAGE SOURCE

The 65th Coastal Artillery Anti Aircraft Regiment was based at Camp Haan. Camp Haan was located at what is now the March Joint Air Reserve near Riverside, California, approximately 60 miles inland from the LA coast (SOURCE). It is possible, however, that Battery B was deployed closer to the coast, but so far I haven't been able to find anything confirming a location at that time. Some sources say San Diego, while others talk about various different locations.

Another interesting thing I found was a page from the "Skylighters" website. They have a page called "A Pictorial History of the Fourth Antiaircraft Command in World War II — Part I: Searchlights" with some great nighttime photos of searchlights in action.

These ones were of particular interest:

sldisplay11.jpg

The Los Angeles Coliseum is illuminated during a welcome

rally for American generals returning from the war.

sldisplay12.jpg

Los Angeles and the distant city of Long Beach lie spread out beneath the searchlight cone

thrown from the Hollywood Bowl during a U. S. Treasury Department bond show.

Notice how in these images, the searchlight beams stop at the cloud base and despite their apparent brightness, cannot be seen to continue past the cloud base.

Then there's this one:

sldisplay7.jpg

Searchlight beams strike the base of the cloud ceiling,

creating an effect resembling a flying disc.

Question is; How come the army didn't mistaken the reflections in the photos above, as a UFO and began firing?

Edited by skyeagle409
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey Cz, I am not sure if this post will work properly, but I have attached the link also, you need to scroll half way down.

Apologies for not responding to some of the posts but I have not been able to since Friday, although have quickly caught up. I will add responses later as I havent the time at the moment.

Anyhow, the link provided shows the analysis of the photo you posted from skylighters. Just thought I would throw this in the mix.

I will also provide the source for Kenneth R Martin as soon as I have the time to find it. :tu:

side by side comparison of the (original BOLA image - L) & (searchlight striking a cloud base image - R)

Enlarge this imageReduce this image Click to see fullsize...

so when comparing the enhancements of the "original" BOLA picture and the "searchlight striking a cloud base" picture we can see there is a distinct difference in the two images.

The possible object in the BOLA image appears to have a more defined outline or shape that would be reminiscent of a craft or UFO verses the anomaly in the "searchlight striking cloud" image which has a dis-organized appearance.

edit: oops forgot the link: http://magic-ufo.for...touched-version

and yes maybe one sided analysis going by websites name but still worth looking at.

Let's compare two photos, one, where there is nothing in the sky.

lifeba10.jpg

The other, where there is,and you can definitely see a defined shape that clearling, is not an aircraft, nor a balloon.:Click on this photo to zoom in on the object.

BattleofLA1942-01.jpg

Edited by skyeagle409
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Or this comparison that mcrom also posted.

i thought it was an adulterated version of the enhanced copy.... :hmm:

32020741d57e.jpg

7e5ac31b6a42.jpg

:td:

But do go read the article in that link. It talks about white paint used to enhance the image. Go figure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why are you still relying on the retouched picture skyeagle? Or didn't you look at this when it was posted earlier?

The searchlights are pointing at one object, and, analysis of the photo have shown that there is an object within the beams. In the video, searchlights from differentl locations are also tracking the object in unison, so, the photos you see, is viable evidence that the object was real.

Note where the light beams end

Edited by skyeagle409
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The mind sometimes needs to be nurtured! And then again sometimes not !

The Battle LA is a time for not ! One could as well just say that they See the Virgin Mary in those images!

Now who would Shoot at the Virgin Mary?

Im need a Bloody Mary now.

Edited by DONTEATUS
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The searchlights are pointing at one object, and, analysis of the photo have shown that there is an object within the beams. In the video, searchlights from differentl locations are also tracking the object in unison, so, the photos you see, is viable evidence that the object was real.

Note where the light beams end

In the non-retouched version of the photo (i.e. the one that hasn't had the semblance of something that someone might construe as a flying saucer painted into it...) all I see is an amorphous blob of converging searchlights.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the non-retouched version of the photo (i.e. the one that hasn't had the semblance of something that someone might construe as a flying saucer painted into it...) all I see is an amorphous blob of converging searchlights.

There was something definitely there, and evident, even in the un-retouched phtoto, and what we have to do now, is to call upon the "process of elimination" to exlude all known objects.

Edited by skyeagle409
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.