UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2007 > May > May 21

Re: U.S. Department Of Defense On UFOs - Ledger

From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
Date: Mon, 21 May 2007 01:46:32 -0300
Fwd Date: Mon, 21 May 2007 07:52:37 -0400
Subject: Re: U.S. Department Of Defense On UFOs - Ledger

>From: Michael Christol <spachopr.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sun, 20 May 2007 09:00:43 -0600
>Subject: Re: U.S. Department Of Defense On UFOs

>>From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
>>To:  ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Sat, 19 May 2007 15:07:42 -0300
>>Subject: Re: U.S. Department Of Defense On UFOs

>>Hi Mike,

>>I'm sure you know that your supposition that these are Earth
>>based objects built by some country on this planet is not a new

>>It turns out that this is correct and the country is Luxembourg.
>>It is actually the most powerful country on the planet but has
>>been keeping this a secret since the late 1940s.

>>Most of the people over the age of 18 in Luxembourg are the
>>pilots of these things because their population is so small and
>>their fleet so large just about everyone has to pitch in
>>including their children who often sign on as crew. They are the
>>root cause of the little aliens that re often reported.


>>Anyway there you have it. The secret is out and I feel the
>>better for it. Now we won't have to peddle around the hidden
>>secrets of the world's most powerful country - which is up for
>>grabs - as the source of the UFO phenomenon.

><G>... Yeah right Don. <LOL>

>Don, I am not new to this field. I have been around it since the

Hi Mike,

Me too, but in the aviation side of it, not so much UFOs. I've
been around airplanes since 1949. Fortunately my Father worked
at Fairey Aviation near where we lived, so I got a thorough
grounding in it from the age of 4.

I'll skip to the bottom of your remarks.


>Hey, I was around when Kenneth Arnold had his sighting. I was
>impressed by the movie footage of George Adamski, as well. In
>fact, I am still impressed with that footage. The 'thing' in the
>video moved like a water bug. It didn't move like conventional
>air craft. It moved up, down. back, forth, seemingly
>effortlessly. Not like a model on a string, being suspended and
>jerked along.


>I mainly got in this discussion with my first reply to "feel the
>waters." Well, now, I see they are still 'boiling', and any
>thought of UFOs having originating on this planet is totally

I don't want to get into that argument again. But I won't buy
into the secret military aircraft as the source of UFO sightings
either. There's no history of it, no

>It is amazing how close the Kenneth Arnold description of the
>objects he saw, comes to matching the Horton Brothers flying
>wings designed for Germany during WWII, yet no one, even today
>wants to consider the possibility that this was what Arnold
>could have seen.

Aw Mike, come on. This is another thing that has been gone over
ad nauseum off and on for the last 10 years on this List.

Where I come from that has as much credibility as the the B-2
bomber explaining away supersonic UFOs. It's not supersonic and
there's a good reason for that, the drag coefficient is too high
for it to get supersonic. It suffers the same problem as the bi-
plane fighters of the 1930s, built in drag. They couldn't get
them to go over about 225 mph because of the built in drag of
that design.

The same holds true of the B-2 and the Hortons. To sustain a
lifting body, like a flying wing, the box cross section of the
wings has to be so thick it just can't ram itself through the
air due to compressibility fast enough to exceed the speed of

Basically it would need and engine or a rocket so large to push
it to the limit that it would be ludicrous; but that wouldn't
make any difference because it would tear itself apart which
would mean you would have to build it stronger and heavier which
would require and even bigger engine which would then tear the
thing apart.

>And the speed? With jet engines, that speed could have been
>achieved. I know this will be rebuffed, because it will be said
>jet engines were not capable of those speeds at that time in our

Well you have answered that one for me. Back then there were no
big jet engines. The United States was developing their jets but
using British engines for the first couple of years. The US spent
all of it's resources on developing the A-bomb. Other endeavors
suffered as a consequence.

It's not the date that matters it's the R&D time leading up to
the development of these engines. It's just too much of a
stretch to think that the United States had grabbed a dozen or
so of these Hortons, which they didn't, developed them, built
far superior engines. They hadn't done any real research on jets
and had little expertise, if any, on the technology.

The Germans and the British were the jet engine leaders at war's

For the US that would push the unpushable through the sound
barrier while spending valuable post war funding using a manned
rocket to break the sound barrier later that year in October.
And again, why bother giving Chuck Yeager months of fun riding
the Bell X-1 up to and through the compressibility zone and
through the sound barrier when you had the technology already.

Check the wings on the Bell X-1 against the wings on the
Hortons. The X-1 was a controllable rocket with little front
plate drag as it's called. The wings on it are to support
control surfaces. The fuselage was shaped like a .50 caliber
bullet, the only bullet that was known to exceed the speed of

If you can't prove the viability of 1947 to 2007 technology as
the culprit for the UFO then you don't have that to support your
argument. But you and others can't claim year in and year out
that we have the capability or had it then when there's
absolutely no aero-space science to support it and no aircraft
to support it-anywhere.

I could really get into this but it would likely bore the hell
out of everybody. It has in the past.

The little piece I wrote was meant to be cheeky while not
getting off on a rant.

Don Ledger

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