UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2007 > May > May 8

Re: MoD Opens Its Files On UFO Sightings To Public

From: Nick Pope <nick.nul>
Date: Mon, 7 May 2007 21:47:21 +0100
Fwd Date: Tue, 08 May 2007 07:13:32 -0400
Subject: Re: MoD Opens Its Files On UFO Sightings To Public

>From: Gerald O'Connell <gac.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sun, 6 May 2007 16:32:35 +0100
>Subject: Re: MoD Opens Its Files On UFO Sightings To Public

>>From: Nick Pope <nick.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Sat, 5 May 2007 13:33:45 +0100
>>Subject: Re: MoD Opens Its Files On UFO Sightings To Public


>>>>>Source: The Guardian - London, UK

>>>>>Thursday May 3, 2007

>>>>>MoD Opens Its Files On UFO Sightings To Public

>>at the time of my
>>tour of duty, radar data was only kept for around a month. So in
>>the case of retrospective reports, meaningful investigation can
>>be difficult or impossible.

>Are you referring to keeping electronic data for one month, or
>any record at all?

I meant that video recordings were routinely taken of radar
screens, with casettes being kept for around a month, before
being reused. So if I wanted to check whether military radar had
picked up an amomalous return that might correlate a UFO
sighting, I needed to requisition the tapes within a month of
the sighting.

>If the electronic data were anomalous and a potential cause for
>concern, would it be kept for longer, or would a non-electronic
>description of it be retained?

>How would all of this fit with, say, standard procedures for
>maintenance? For example, if anomalous readings were attributed
>to intermittent system faults, one presumes that data would be
>retained and accumulated until the fault were identified and
>resolved. Would it not be feasible (indeed, essential) that
>anomalous data not ultimately determined to be attributable to
>system faults could be retained for a longer (perhaps much
>longer) period? Even when such data were erased in its original
>electronic form, would there not be a written/descriptive record
>of it kept (at least for the lifetime of the system concerned)
>as part of a system performance logging process?

After investigation, some radar returns that initially look
anomalous can be attributed to technical faults, anomalous
propagation, infereference with other radar systems or even
something as mundane as a flock of birds. Data retention would
be on a case by case basis. I would expect that in the case of
anything interesting or unusual, data would be kept until the
matter was resolved or closed.

>If the answer to that last one were to be a positive, then a
>whole new line of potential research might be indicated:
>correlation of anomalous sightings with radar system maintenance
>data. Who knows what exotic new forms of 'plasma' might emerge
>from such an undertaking...

An interesting idea.

Best wishes,

Nick Pope


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



[ 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