Have UFOs been monitoring nuclear sites ?

[badeskov]

Sigh...do we really have to go through this pathetic debacle again? This nonsense has been debunked over and over again...

Cheers,
Badeskov

[Rlyeh]

4 hours ago, skyeagle409 said:

 And now, the UK. I am interested in the RAF Bentwaters UFO incident because my assistant on an Air Force contract at Travis AFB was based at RAF Bentwaters during the incident.

Weren't they time travellers from the year 8100?

[stereologist]

The Minot incident was thoroughly debunked in this thread

No need to trash that incident in a new separate thread.

[+Hammerclaw]

The incident at Maxwell Field is still hush-hush.

 

[ChrLzs]

8 hours ago, skyeagle409 said:

I have been aware that UFOs have been seen over the Minuteman missile sites and interfering with our missiles. I was stationed at Hill AFB, UT., and my base was called to investigate because we were the depot for the Minuteman missile and the eyewitness accounts of the UFOs over the missile sites and investigation conclusions were chilling. One of the officers who wrote a letter on the UFO  incident at Malmstrom AFB, was Lt. Col. Lewis Chase. Lt. Col. Chase was also the pilot of a RB-47 that was chased over multiple states by a UFO.

In another incident, the former Soviet Union lost control of its nuclear missiles, which eventually went into launch status after a UFO appeared over its missile base.

Absolute rubbish, Sky.  Stop claiming stuff and SHOW the evidence to support your claims.

Hastings and Salas are liars who try to make a buck out of pushing this stuff on the UFO conference circuit.  They have been proven to misrepresent many of the very few facts surrounding these 'incidents' - most of which NEVER occurred.

You say they did?  Prove it.

BTW, to give what I think is a pretty fair assessment of the Hastings/Salas/Carlson debacle, you might want to start here - it is (rightly) critical of all sides, but read all about the NON-evidence and anonymous information that is being accepted by the UFO pushers.  This has been rehashed over and over, and frankly, I'd prefer if none of them were drawn back to UM into more endless and pointless debate over stuff that is not, was not and will not ever be documented in a way as to prove anything whatsoever.  This has been hashed and rehashed here and elsewhere numerous times, as others have pointed out.

It's the biggest dead end in UFOlogy, and is one of the best examples of why UFOlogy is in absolute tatters. If there were things buzzing those installations, they were experimental spy craft.  As for the electrical interference claims, they are beyond ridiculous.

 

BTW, your document image is an unreadable thumbnail.  Please ask someone to help you with your postings.

[skyeagle409]

4 hours ago, ChrLzs said:

Absolute rubbish, Sky.  Stop claiming stuff and SHOW the evidence to support your claims.

 

I am right on the mark. In fact, Some time ago, I have posted the actual government document signed by Lt. Col. Lewis D. Chase..

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE 
HEADQUARTERS 341ST COMBAT SUPPORT GROUP (SAC) 
MALMSTROM AIR FORCE BASE, MT 590402 

REPLY TO 
ATTN OF: BO 3 July 1967 

SUBJECT: UFO Observations, Malmstrom AFB Area 

to: Colonel James C. Manatt (lettered TDET/UFO) 
HQ Foreign Technology Division (AFSC) 
Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio 45433 

1. Reference TDET/UFO letter dated 30 June 1967 on above subject. 

2. This office has no knowledge of equipment malfunctions and abnormalities in equipment during the period of reported UFO sightings. No validity can be established to the statement that a classified government experiment was in progress or that military and civilian personnel were requested not to discuss what they had seen. 

3. A written report on the events that transpired during the alleged UFO reported landing on 24 March 1967, fully documents all findings by the investigating officer. A copy of this report was forwarded to your office on 3 April 1967. 

4. If we can be of further assistance to you, please do not hesitate to write. 

FOR THE COMMANDER 

LEWIS D. CHASE, Lt Colonel, USAF 
Chief, Operations Division 

 

Another UFO incident involving the RB-47 of Lt. Col. Lewis D. Chase.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited July 12, 2016 by skyeagle409

[skyeagle409]

5 hours ago, stereologist said:

The Minot incident was thoroughly debunked in this thread

 

False. Let's take a look here.

"* DOD, USAF, and CIA document reveal that during October, November, and December of 1975, reliable military personnel repeatedly sighted unconventional aerial objects in the vicinity of nuclear-weapons storage areas, aircraft alert areas and nuclear-missile control facilities at Loring Air Force Base, Maine; Wurtsmith AFB Michigan; Malstrom AFB, Montana; Minot AFB, North Dakota; and Canadian Air Forces Station, Ontario. Many of the sightings were confirmed by radar. At Loring AFB, the interloper "demonstrated a clear intent on the weapons storage areas." 

A NARRATIVE OF UFO EVENTS AT MINOT AIR FORCE BASE 

Upon reaching the object the B-52 flew alongside and executed a left turn over and around it. As the B-52 banked over the object, copilot Capt. Bradford Runyon was able to observe the UFO through the pilot’s window as it passed beneath the aircraft. He described a huge egg-shaped object with a surface that appeared to give off a dull reddish color like molten steel. As they began the turn, he noticed a smooth metallic tubular section extending horizontally from the long-end of the elliptical object, connecting to the mid-point of a curved crescent-shaped protuberance, not unlike a bumper. This section encompassed the width of the body and emanated a greenish-yellow glow from its interior back, illuminating the tubular section and the front of the egg-shaped main body of the object. Once again, their radios would not transmit during the very close approach.

Minot AFB 

http://minotb52ufo.com/

Minot AFB B-52 Radar Scope

Radar scope imagery of the UFO taken after the UFO slowed from 3000 mph to match the airspeed of the aircraft. 

 

Edited July 12, 2016 by skyeagle409

[skyeagle409]

3 hours ago, Hammerclaw said:

The incident at Maxwell Field is still hush-hush.

 

There are other UFO incidents that remain classified to this very day. 

[skyeagle409]

7 hours ago, Thorvir Hrothgaard said:

Have UFOs been monitoring nuclear sites ?

Um, no.

Let's take  look here.

"During the first 11 days of November, dozens of UFO incursions took place over or near sensitive missile silos, many described by notations in the NORAD command director's log later FOIA-released. Near Harlowtown, Mont., at Site Lima-1, a UFO hovered within 10 feet of the missile silo, drawing the attention of a missile crew in a nearby support building." 

[+Hammerclaw]

6 minutes ago, skyeagle409 said:

There are other UFO incidents that remain classified to this very day. 

True, but not all involve a SAC B-52 and a garrulous navigator by the name of Ross Toothman.

[skyeagle409]

34 minutes ago, Hammerclaw said:

True, but not all involve a SAC B-52 and a garrulous navigator by the name of Ross Toothman.

Yes indeed! The Air Force has acknowledged on more than one occasion that the UFOs are "interplanetary spaceships." Disclosure was going to be made on live TV on January 22, 1958, on the CBS Armstrong Circle Theater, but the censors cut the audio. When CBS was asked as to why they cut the audio, the reply was; it was done in the interest of  "national security.", 

Edited July 12, 2016 by skyeagle409

[ChrLzs]

47 minutes ago, skyeagle409 said:

I am right on the mark. In fact, Some time ago, I have posted the actual government document signed by Lt. Col. Lewis D. Chase..

Which DOES NOT backup your claim, in anyway whatsoever!  Do you not READ your own documents????  Here, let me help by just leaving in the important words:

 

47 minutes ago, skyeagle409 said:

2. This office has no knowledge of equipment malfunctions and abnormalities in equipment during the period of reported UFO sightings. No validity can be established to the statement that a classified government experiment was in progress or that military and civilian personnel were requested not to discuss what they had seen. 
 

WHY do you waste our time posting such drivel that doesn't support what you are claiming?

[+Hammerclaw]

3 minutes ago, skyeagle409 said:

Yes indeed! The Air Force has acknowledged on more than one occasion that the UFOs are "interplanetary spaceships." Disclosure was going to be made on live TV on January 22, 1958, on the CBS Armstrong Circle Theater, but the censors cut the audio. When CBS was asked as to why they cut the audio, the replay was; it was done in the interest of  "national security.", 

Happened when his BUFF was in a holding pattern waiting it's turn to land after one those around the world hypothetical sorties SAC was famous for in late '50s. Loaded for Bear, too.

[ChrLzs]

And then Sky posts a blob on a radar plucked from a website promoting the incident, without any actual source data, nor proper expert analysis of the capabilities and limitations of the radar in question.

Let's completely go with it, though - it's an unidentified thingy.  How the heck does anyone (other than Sky) leap from that to interfering with, let alone even getting near to, nuclear installations???

Sky, you are not posting in good faith, and it seems you now routinely rely on people not reading the things that you vomit forth..

[skyeagle409]

8 minutes ago, ChrLzs said:

Which DOES NOT backup your claim, in anyway whatsoever!  Do you not READ your own documents????  Here, let me help by just leaving in the important words:

 

WHY do you waste our time posting such drivel that doesn't support what you are claiming?

You forgot to add:

. A written report on the events that transpired during the alleged UFO reported landing on 24 March 1967, fully documents all findings by the investigating officer. A copy of this report was forwarded to your office on 3 April 1967. 

 

 

 

[ChrLzs]

So QUOTE that document!!!  For heaven's sake, this is ridiculous.

[skyeagle409]

4 minutes ago, ChrLzs said:

So QUOTE that document!!!  For heaven's sake, this is ridiculous.

UNCLAS ZIPPO 2414 MAR 67/SUBJ: PRELIMINARY UFO REPORT.

 

FTD FOR TDETR, CSAF FOR AFRDC, OS X FOR SAF-01.

 

BETWEEN THE HOURS 2100 AND 0400 MST NUMEROUS REPORTS

 

WERE RECEIVED BY MAELSTROM AFB AGENCIES OF UFO SIGHTINGS

 

IN THE GREAT FALLS, MONTANA AREA,

 

REPORTS OVER UFO LANDING NEAR BELT, MONTANA WERE RECEIVED

 

FROM SEVERAL SOURCES INCLUDING DEPUTIES OF CASCADE COUNTY

 

SHERIFF’S OFFICE. INVESTIGATION IS BEING CONDUCTED BY

======

 

UNCLASSIFIED

 

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE

STAFF MESSAGE BRANCH

INCOMING MESSAGE

 

AFIN: 25062

 

LT COL LEWIS CHASE PHONE: DUTY EXT 2215, HOME 452-1135

 

BASE OPERATIONS OFFICER. THE ALLEGED LANDING SITE IS

 

UNDER SURVEILLANCE, HOWEVER DAYLIGHT IS REQUIRED FOR

 

FURTHER SEARCH

[ChrLzs]

'Numerous reports', eh?  None of which are quoted nor explained.

And none of this refers to any sort of monitoring or interference with nuclear installations, and what's more absolutely NOTHING was found in the way of evidence of anything at all.

As you well know, Sky.

[skyeagle409]

18 minutes ago, ChrLzs said:

'Numerous reports', eh?  None of which are quoted nor explained.

And none of this refers to any sort of monitoring or interference with nuclear installations, and what's more absolutely NOTHING was found in the way of evidence of anything at all.

As you well know, Sky.

The UFO took off and was gone. Now, let's take a look at the Malmstrom AFB missile incident several days earlier.

.

Quote

Former Boeing Engineer, Robert Kaminski Confirms UFO Activity at Echo Flight Missile Launch Control Facility in 1967

 “Since this was a field site peculiar incident, a determination was made to send out an investigation team to survey the LCF [Echo Launch Control Facility] and the LFs [Launch Facilities, or silos] to determine what failures or related incidents could be found to explain the cause. The team was made up of qualified engineers and technicians headed by scientific person who was a glaciologist. There were about 5 persons in all that were sent out. After a week in the field the team returned and pooled their data. At the outset the team quickly noticed a lack of anything that would come close to explain why the event occurred. There were no significant failures, engineering data or findings that would explain how ten missiles were knocked off alert. This indeed turned out to be a rare event and not encountered before. The use of backup power systems and other technical system circuit operational redundancy strongly suggests that this kind of event is virtually impossible once the system was up and running and on line with other LCF's and LF's interconnectivity.

[After months of investigation,] the team met with me to report their findings and it was decided that the final report would have nothing significant in it to explain what happened at E-Flight. In other words there was no technical explanation that could explain the event. The team went off to do the report. Meanwhile I was contacted by our representative at OOAMA (Don Peterson) and told by him that the incident was reported as being a UFO event—That a UFO was seen by some Airmen over the LCF  at the time E-Flight went down.

 

Notice where it said: OOAMA.  OOAMA is located at Hill AFB, where I was assigned. The conclusion was that the missiles were shutdown from EMP outside the shielded cables. In other words, no malfunction was found within the system itself and what are UFOs known to produce? EMP. Where did the EMP originate from? Outside the shielded cables.

 

Edited July 12, 2016 by skyeagle409

[ChrLzs]

Assuming I take that as gospel (would you mind quoting the actual REPORT, rather than an anecdotal summary..?), then, NO REASON was found.

That's ALL.

But to Sky (and Hastings and crew) that equals Aliens causing it.  Not a shred of logic, no explanation on how they think aliens could (or would want to) do it, no reasoning behind ruling out the Russki's, or a hitherto unknown issue that, gee, maybe they should be worried about..  No, most definitely not a *new* type of failure, or something they hadn't encountered before or thought of ... Yes, Electronics Engineers are, as we all know, supreme beings who know everything that can possibly happen, and then what is left must be aliens...

[skyeagle409]

1 minute ago, ChrLzs said:

Assuming I take that as gospel (would you mind quoting the actual REPORT, rather than an anecdotal summary..?), then, NO REASON was found.

That's ALL.

But to Sky (and Hastings and crew) that equals Aliens causing it.  Not a shred of logic, no explanation on how they think aliens could (or would want to) do it, no reasoning behind ruling out the Russki's, or a hitherto unknown issue that, gee, maybe they should be worried about..  No, most definitely not a *new* type of failure, or something they hadn't encountered before or thought of ... Yes, Electronics Engineers are, as we all know, supreme beings who know everything that can possibly happen, and then what is left must be aliens...

Flying saucers were reported over the missile fields on more than one occasion at Malmstrom AFB and in some cases, aircraft were called to investigate. In the Minot AFB UFO encounter, the B-52 nuclear bomber was in close-proximity of the UFO, which clearly, was not of this world. 

 

[ChrLzs]

And off he goes again, avoiding debate and raising new red herrings..

The Malmstrom report in it's entirety can be found here:

http://documents.theblackvault.com/documents/ufos/malmstromufo.pdf

It's not exactly riveting stuff and I'll happily admit that I don't understand a lot of the discussion.  But I found none of the hyped up talk about how Omigod it is impossible to be of earthly origin, as sky portrays it, indeed, allow me to QUOTE it:

Quote

Rumors of Unidentified Flying Objects (UFO) around the area of Echo Flight during the time of fault were disproven.
A Mobile Strike Team, which had checked all November Flight's LFs on the morning of 16 March '67, were questioned and stated
that no unusual activity or sightings were observed.
...
The investigation of the incident could not discover the cause .. but it was believed to be a freak incident.

I see no mention of aliens - perhaps Sky can quote that part?... in fact there's not even a mention of potential sabotage by foreign powers, so it seems to me rather strongly indicative that they knew it was nothing suspicious - they simply couldn't find what it was...

Any other interpretation might as well be to blame The Fairies or Pink Unicorns.  Oh, unless you can make a buck out of it on the UFO talk show circuit.

[S2F]

If one tallies the total number of UFO reports and compares them to the number of UFO reports involving nuclear 'installations' you will find that the outcome very strongly suggests that UFO's mostly ignore nuclear sites. 

Edited July 12, 2016 by S2F

[toast]

2 hours ago, skyeagle409 said:

UNCLAS ZIPPO 2414 MAR 67/SUBJ: PRELIMINARY UFO REPORT.FTD FOR TDETR, CSAF FOR AFRDC, OS X FOR SAF-01.

blablabla,bla,

*snip*

Do you know the meaning of the word "document"? No, you dont.

[stereologist]

Quote

False. Let's take a look here.

That's not true. We've been through this before. The Minot incident was thoroughly debunked.

I'll post the link to the other thread in which the false claims about the incident have been pointed out.

http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum/topic/280667-ufos-during-wartime/?page=36

Quote

For 5 weeks people asked you to supply the report. Then you admitted attempted to fabricate evidence.

Quote

Again you misconstrue being open minded with the act of assigning a particular incident to being of ET origin.

Quote

You do not do that, you repeat the same flaws, and insist people accept it, and continue to forget any other information exists.

Endlessly repeating yourself is pointless and just frustrates people, mainly because you are just repeating the same flaw over and again.