UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 1997 > Nov > Nov 5

Re: ET Hypothesis: Government Concern?

From: "Serge Salvaille" <sergesa@connectmmic.net>
Date: Tue, 04 Nov 1997 16:30:56 +0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 05 Nov 1997 11:40:50 -0500
Subject: Re: ET Hypothesis: Government Concern?

For the record,

I would like to refer to the document found on page 225-230 of the
book "Vague d'OVNI sur la Belgique".  If I believe the authors, it is
"La version int=E9grale du rapport de synth=E8se de la force a=E9rienne"
titled "Rapport concernant l'observation d'OVNI durant la nuit du 30
au 31 mars 1990".  It can be translated:

... The integral version of the...
"Report concerning UFOs observed during the night of march 30-31 1990"
[by Major Lambrechts]

You can also find this french report at:

The text of the report on this site varies slightly from the one in
the book (go figure why), but the meaning is the same.  You will also
find at www.finart.be/UfocomHQ more information regarding this
particular sighting.

I include here a palatable (?) translation of the conclusions of the
Lambrechts Report, with the original text in annex.  Who knows, French
citations may become as fashionable as the British accent :)

Serge Salvaille


 "Report concerning UFOs observed during the night of march 30-31
"[Major Lambrechts]


"*** Conclusions ***

a. Contrary to other UFO sightings reported, for the first time a
radar contact was made with different sensors of the Air Force (CRC,
TOC, RAPCON, EBBE and F-16 radar), and in the same zone as that of the
visual sightings.  This can be explained by the fact that the March
30-31 UFOs were observed at altitudes around 10 000 feet, while other
cases always implied very low altitude visual contacts.

b. Testimonies on which this report is based originated in part from
policemen in service.  There is no doubt on their objectivity

c. The UFOs, when visualized on the F-16 radar in "Target Attack"mode,
changed their parameters drastically.  The measured speeds and changes
in altitude exclude the possibility of aircraft.  The slow speeds
during other phases also differ from that of aircrafts.

d. The pilots never made visual contact with the UFOs.  This can be
explained by changes in light intensity and even disappearing of the
UFOs as the F-16 arrived in the zones where they were observed on the

e. The radar observations and the geometrical positions of the UFOs
(relatively to one another) rule out the following explanations:
optical illusion, confusion with planets and any other meteorological

f. When first observed, the UFOs were slowly moving in the same
direction and at the same speed as the wind.  Then the direction
changed from 30 degrees from the wind.  The weather balloon hypothesis
is here totally improbable.  The UFOs stayed at 10 000 feet while
weather balloons continue to rise to 100 000 feet where they blow up.
The bright lights and changes of color are hardly consistent with
weather balloons.  Balloons do not stay at the same altitude during
one hour while keeping the same position relatively to one another.
In Belgium, during the radar observations, there was no meteorological
inversion.  The hypothesis that it could be some other kind of balloon
cannot stand.

g. Even if speeds greater than the speed of sound were often observed,
no shock waves have been detected.  We cannot explain this.

h. Different ground witnesses have observed a total of 8 lights [dots]
in the sky but the radars have registered only one contact at the same
time.  The distance between the lights [dots] would have allowed a
differentiation by the radars.  We have no plausible explanation for

i. The laser hologram hypothesis must also be rejected: the pilots
would normally have detected them.  Furthermore, holograms cannot be
detected by radar and projections need a screen (clouds for example).
At the time of the sighting the weather was clear and there were no
significant temperature inversion.


"Rapport concernant l'observation d'OVNI durant la nuit du 30 au 31
mars 1990"[rapport du Major Lambrechts]


"*** Constatations ***

a. La premi=E8re observation du d=E9placement lent des OVNI s'est faite =E0
peu pr=E8s dans la m=EAme direction et la m=EAme vitesse que le vent.  La
direction diff=E8re de 30 degr=E9s de celle du vent (260 au lieu de 230).
L'hypoth=E8se qu'il s'agit ici de ballons-sondes est tout =E0 fait
improbable.  L'altitude des OVNI reste dans cette phase =E0 10 000
pieds, alors que les ballons-sondes continuent de s'=E9lever jusqu'=E0
l'=E9clatement vers 100 000 pieds.  Les lumi=E8res brillantes et leur
changement de couleur peuvent =EAtre difficilement expliqu=E9s par de tels
ballons.  Il est tout =E0 fait improbable que des ballons restent =E0 la m
=EAme altitude pendant plus d'une heure, tout en conservant la m=EAme
position entre eux.  En Belgique, au moment des observations radars,
il n'y avait aucune inversion m=E9t=E9orologique en cours.  L'hypoth=E8se
qu'il pourrait s'agir d'autres ballons est =E0 =E9carter absolument.

b. Bien qu'on ait plusieurs fois mesur=E9 des vitesses sup=E9rieures =E0
celle du son, aucune onde de choc n'a =E9t=E9 signal=E9e.  Ici aussi, aucune
explication ne peut =EAtre donn=E9e.

c. Bien que les diff=E9rent t=E9moins au sol aient finalement signal=E9 huit
points dans le ciel, les radars ont enregistr=E9 un seul contact au m=EAme
moment.  Les points ont =E9t=E9 vus =E0 distance suffisante les uns des
autres pour que les radars puissent les diff=E9rencier aussi.  Aucune
explication plausible ne peut =EAtre avanc=E9e.

d. L'hypoth=E8se de ph=E9nom=E8ne a=E9riens r=E9sultant de projections
d'hologrammes est =E0 exclure =E9galement : les projecteurs lasers
auraient d=FB =EAtre normalement observ=E9s par les pilotes en vol.  De
plus, les hologrammes ne peuvent pas =EAtre d=E9tect=E9s par radar et une
projection laser ne peut se voir que s'il existe un =E9cran comme des
nuages par exemple.  Or ici, le ciel =E9tait d=E9gag=E9 et il n'y avait
aucune inversion de temp=E9rature significative.

e. En contradiction avec d'autres observations signal=E9es d'OVNI, pour
la premi=E8re fois a =E9t=E9 observ=E9 positivement un contact radar en
corr=E9lation avec diff=E9rents senseurs de la force a=E9rienne (CRC, TOC,
RAPCON, EBBE et radar F-16) et cela dans la m=EAme zone que les
observations visuelles.  Ceci est =E0 expliquer par le fait que les OVNI
du 30/31 mars ont =E9t=E9 not=E9s =E0 une altitude de +/- 10000 pieds, alors
que dans les cas pr=E9c=E9dents il =E9tait toujours question de contacts
visuels =E0 tr=E8s basse altitude.

f. Les t=E9moignages =E0 vue, sur lesquelles ce rapport se base
partiellement, ont =E9t=E9 faits par des gendarmes en service et leur
objectivit=E9 ne pourrait =EAtre mise en doute.

g. Les OVNI, aussit=F4t visualis=E9s par le radar F-16 dans le mode
"Target Attack" (apr=E8s interception), ont chang=E9 drastiquement leurs
param=E8tres.  Les vitesses mesur=E9es =E0 ce moment-l=E0 et les changements
d'altitude excluent l'hypoth=E8se que les OVNI observ=E9s pourraient =EAtre
confondus avec des avions.  Les mouvements lents pendant les autres
phases diff=E8rent =E9galement de ceux des avions.

h. Les pilotes des avions de chasse n'ont jamais eu de contact visuel
avec les OVNI.  Ceci peut =EAtre expliqu=E9 par les changements de
l'intensit=E9 lumineuse et m=EAme de la disparition des OVNI au moment o=F9
les F-16 arrivaient dans les environs o=F9 ils =E9taient observ=E9s au sol.

i. L'hypoth=E8se selon laquelle il s'agirait d'une illusion d'optique,
d'une confusion avec des plan=E8tes ou tout autre ph=E9nom=E8ne
m=E9t=E9orologique est contradictoire avec les observations sur radar,
notamment l'altitude aux environs de 10 000 pieds et les positions
g=E9om=E9triques des OVNI entre eux. La formation g=E9om=E9trique tend =E0
prouver un plan-programme.

Search for other documents from or mentioning: sergesa

[ 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