UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 1997 > Nov > Nov 6

Re: Belgian Radar-Visual

From: Christophe Meessen <meessen@cppm.in2p3.fr>
Date: Thu, 06 Nov 1997 11:44:47 +0100
Fwd Date: Thu, 06 Nov 1997 20:22:55 -0500
Subject: Re: Belgian Radar-Visual

I would like to add some perspective to this information.

We do have different type of evidences but SOME of them have
found a possible explaination. My father proposed an explanation
for all radar related evidences. The current conclusion is that
MOST but NOT ALL radar evidences are artefacts.

The first type of artefact are atmospheric diffraction as
correctly stated by J.Pharabod. But they have a caracteristic
signature that make them easy to identify. The most important of
them is that there is no correlation of these echos between two
radars.

The second type of artefact are convection bubles. In this case
two different radars will report an echo at the same location.
Second, it appeared that flight identification normaly sent by
airplanes could be mistakenly affected to these bubles. This
appeared when I noticed that two simultaneous and independent
echos showed the same military flight identification. This was
obviously bogus and we guess result of a reflection on the
convection buble of the identification signal sent by the
original plane. But these type of artefacts can also be
identified because they all follow wind direction (thus parallel
for all tracks), fly at a relatively constant altitude, and a
constant speed.

When seeing these many unexplained echoes my father was suprise
by the apparent indifference of these phenomenon from the
radarist who learned to live with it.

These two artefact types are specific to ground radar and concern
civilian as military radars.

I must say here that there is one echo track we found that can't
be classified in these two categories.

But in general apparently no correlation was seen between ground
visual observation and radar echoes.

Now about the F16 radar echoes. This was intensively studied and
compared with previous studies. This event had ground visual
observations by different gendarmes (policemens) at different
location, ground radar echoes from civilian and military and of
course the F16 radar recordings. But even with all these
extraordinar conjuction of evidences, all of them could be
explained by conventional phenomenon. This does not mean there
was not an UFO, but it means that the question becomes
undecidable. At least this study unveiled a potential problem
with radar using doppler effect.  Again F16 radar echoes with
similar behavour is frequently seen at 30000 Feet and was told by
the pilots themselves. But in this case it happened at a much
lower altitude. This night meteorological conditions were also
unusual.

I can give more details on this study if requested.

The final conclusion I would like to make about this information
is that this does NOT explain UFOs reported from visual contact
or on photographs. For instance the photograph of a triangular
object over Petit Rechain has been give a high degree of
credibility after deep study.

About radar evidences all we can say is that it is possible that
UFOs that may have flown over belgium where not detectable by our
radars.

So to me what happened in Belgium these two years remain an
unsolved mystery and the proposed explanation for radar evidence
hardly scratch the mystery. It would be, in my opinion, a mistake
to draw any other conclusion on the belgian ufo flap.

Ch.Meessen


Search for other documents from or mentioning: meessen

[ 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