UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2007 > Nov > Nov 18

Re: NPC - Witness Testimony

From: Martin Shough <parcellular.nul>
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2007 11:32:36 -0000
Archived: Sun, 18 Nov 2007 07:46:30 -0500
Subject: Re: NPC - Witness Testimony


From: Steve Kaeser<Steve.Kaeser.nul>
To: <ufoupdates.nul>
Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 13:02:54 -0500
Subject: NPC - Witness Testimony


Thanks for the transcript, Steve.

This seems like an opportune moment to update the List on
progress with the April 2007 Channel Islands case (see Capt
Bowyer's statement which I left in below). The 'final' report by
our small team here in the UK and France is presently being
written up.

To summarise what we have done: From several eyewitness
accounts, recordings of Channel Island Zone and Jersey Approach
radio traffic, and the ATC radar picture, we have produced a
detailed geometrical reconstruction in three dimensions of the
various evolving lines of sight and angular relationships,
modelled the meteorological conditiions as closely as possible
from weatrher reports and radiosonde profiles with professional
expert advice from Jersey Met Office and others, estimated radar
and optical refractivity with the help of Meteo-France computer
numerical simulation, examined satellite imagery and the Jersey
weather radar scans, investigated numerous relevant factors such
as local seismology, shipping routes and ocean conditions, and
explored in detail a number of possible explanations with the
help of atmospheric optics experts, geophysicists and others.

One of our earliest efforts was to try to get the reluctant Blue
Islands 'Jetstream' pilot to talk to us and flesh out his very
brief CAA report. After trying several avenues we have so far
been unsuccessful. Although efforts in that direction are not
quite dead, we tried breaking down the event into unconnected
sightings on the principle that if the main phenomena reported
by Capt Bowyer and passengers could be explained convincingly
then we might be able to dispose of the sketchy corroboration
separately.

We found certain clues suggestive of an atmospheric-optical
explanation for the UAPs seen by Capt Bowyer and passengers, and
we have tried very hard to find a model that works. But with the
best will in the world we have not been completely successful.
There remain several aspects of the appearance, bearings and
angular motions of the UAPs that we are so far unable to
explain. It also has to be said that when the various changing
lines of sight are carefully plotted on the radar map they
produce a triangulated fix on two static locations in the
Channel Islands airspace, a triangulation whose internal linear
and angular estimates all interlock with notable consistency and
quite small margins of error.

This result makes colateral evidence all the more important. We
can advance reasons for thinking that Jetstream's report needs
to be taken seriously. We certainly can't justify riding rough-
shod over it, but we can't ignore it's shortcomings either;
neither can we ignore the fact that another aircrew within a
couple of miles of the location of UAP#1 simultaneously saw
nothing.

The other obvious factor is radar. We looked at ATC radar and
weather radar and requested a search of air defence radar
recordings by the French CCOA. The result of the latter was
negative. ATC and weather radar results were either negative or
inconclusive.

We obtained a number of radar products from Jersey ATC,
including composite screenshots showing the tracks and altitudes
of transponding aircraft along with large numbers of
uncorrelated primary echoes. These files were useful in many
ways. We also obtained complete 24-hour Primary Surveillance
Radar data files at an early date, which would allow moment by
moment replay, but the difficulties of visualising them proved
great owing to commercial software licensing issues, cost etc.
After a promising initial contact with GEIPAN we had hoped that
they might assist, but in the event we learned that they had
independently approached Jersey ATC for the same data and were
pursuing their own study. They regretted that were not in a
position to share software or expertise outside GEIPAN. A small
last-ditch effort to extract limited data is ongoing, but in the
main we decided to limit our study of the ATC radar to the
composite screenshots in our possession, await GEIPAN's more
detailed analysis and focus resources elsewhere.

The ATC radar materials available to us, together with the
Jersey weather radar scans, do not offer evidence of
extraordinary targets in the area. An unexplained radar echo has
been mentioned, but so far we have not confirmed this. The
professional opinion of the Air Traffic Controller who observed
it is that it was probably a surface target seen because of
anomalous propagation. Our analysis of the target environment
and of the propagation conditions supports this opinion. There
may yet be data recoverable by GEIPAN's detailed analysis,
however the fact that MTI was operating on the radar means that
stationary or very slow-moving targets would be eliminated from
the display, and since (as we understand) the processing is done
at the radar head to conserve bandwidth in the transmission to
Jersey ATC, with the pre-digitised raw signal data being dumped,
any such filtered signal may be permanently lost. Weather radar
does not use MTI and processing is minimal, but resolution and
sample-rate are poor. We examined available weather radar images
but the only low-elevation cut covering the area during the
sighting time, for one single antenna revolution, showed nothing
conclusive.

This is where we stand at present and it's turned into rather
more of a formal statement than I'd intended. But it's probably
timely. All of the detailed documents, research and
argumentation will be made available in our report just as soon
as possible. Our tentative conclusion will be that there appears
to be evidence of some phenomenon, possibly with an atmospheric-
optical component, that isn't described in any conventional
theory that we know of. The Jetstream observation on a
reciprocal line of sight is evidence suggesting the presence of
a physical object or objects at the location(s) visually
triangulated, but this evidence remains weak and is
uncorroborated by radar evidence at the present time.

I'll post a link to the report when available. Ours will not be
by any means a final word on this case, of course. But we hope
that others will find our efforts useful in future
investigation, and we also await GEIPAN's independent results
with interest.

-----

Ray Bowyer

Good afternoon Ladies and Gentlemen and thank you for coming
today. My name is Ray Bowyer and I fly a civilian airliner as
Captain. I have been invited here due to my sighting last April
of multiple as yet unidentified objects over the Channel Islands
region of the English Channel. This encounter lasted for 15
minutes with the first object being visible from 55 miles
distant.

On nearing the object a second identical shape appeared beyond
the first. Both objects were of a flattened disk shape with a
dark area to the right side. They were brilliant yellow with
light emanating from them. I estimated them to be up to a mile
across.

I found myself astounded but curious. But at 12 miles distant
these objects were becoming uncomfortably large, and I was glad
to descend and land the aircraft.

Many of my passengers saw the objects as did the pilot of
another aircraft 25 miles further south. There is also possible
radar information still being investigated.

A team headed by Dr. David Clarke looking at this case will
shortly publish a report but I understand that at this time no
definitive solution has been discovered to explain the sighting.

I have taken note of the differences between the British and
U.S. reporting system. It appears that attitudes on opposite
sides of the Atlantic Ocean are very different when it comes to
the required reporting and recording of this type of event.

Air Law stipulates quite clearly that if an operating crew of an
aircraft see another aircraft a place that it should not he,
then at the earliest opportunity the whole scenario is to be
reported to the relevant authority.

In my case the British Civil Aviation Authority knew within 20
minutes of the sighting what was seen, as described in the
flight log faxed directly to the relevant CM office. The
military were informed by Jersey Air Traffic Control at the same
time. This is not an option; it is an obligation that crews
react in this manner.

In my experience, having reported the incident as required has
had no negative effect. And there was no problem with me talking
about it on British television. Indeed, my company Aurigny Air
Services have offered every support to date. The assistance of
Jersey ATC in releasing recorded information to myself and the
investigating team has been a great benefit. I did not feel that
I was in any danger of being ridiculed, because all I did was
report what actually happened, as was my duty.

I heard about the multiple witness sighting at Chicago O Hare
Airport a year ago, on November 7, 2006. I was surprised to hear
how this was handled. Despite many pilots and airport personnel
witnessing the object hovering over the terminal, there was no
investigation by the FAA. It appears that pressure may have been
applied to crew members by their company not to discuss this
incident.

These witnesses were afraid to talk about what they saw, due to
concerns about job security. The FAA told the witnesses that
what they saw was actually not what they saw but that it was
simply weather,

I would have been shocked if I was told that the CAA would
obstruct an investigation, or if the CAA told me that what I had
seen was something entirely different. But it seems that pilots
in America are used to this kind of thing, as far as I can tell.

I would urge all aircrew to report whatever they see as soon as
possible, and to stand up and be counted. It is only when
crucial witnesses such as professional pilots make reports that
the authorities will be kick-started into a broader
investigation of these phenomena.

-----


Martin Shough




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

See:

http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/sdi/program/subscribers/


[ 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