Black triangle - Humber (revisited)
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Leeds
Posts: 702
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Black triangle - Humber (revisited)
Hi.
I started a thread on here last month about how I'd spotted what was blatantly a UAV operating along the coast of Lincolnshire near Donna Nook. It was about 3am and I was out on the shore not far from Conisholme when I saw it.
I didn't divulge full details on the boards here at the time, just because of the usual **** you get on here when you mention something like that, but I had a good chat with some folks by PM. Suffice to say, what I saw really was very un-mysterious and clearly 'of this world'.
I was told I may have seen a Typhoon etc etc, but I see them daily and I know what I'm looking at when it comes to 'regular' military planes. I've lived on the doorstep of RAF installations my whole life.
But anyways, this story is making big news today and I'm wondering what people think.
BBC NEWS | England | Lincolnshire | UFO claim over wind farm damage
UFO hits wind turbine | The Sun |News|UFOs
The wind farm is, by pure coincidence, at Conisholme.
And just for the record, I don't think for a minute that a flying saucer caused this, nor am I saying a UAV smashed into the turbine. Just pondering.
And in case any journos are reading - no, I'm not gonna talk to you. There are plenty of folks who've seen these around here just lately. Rational witnesses are easy to find, but I apppreciate that sweet little old ladies with digital cameras talking about flying octupus-like creatures from Mars will sell more papers.
I started a thread on here last month about how I'd spotted what was blatantly a UAV operating along the coast of Lincolnshire near Donna Nook. It was about 3am and I was out on the shore not far from Conisholme when I saw it.
I didn't divulge full details on the boards here at the time, just because of the usual **** you get on here when you mention something like that, but I had a good chat with some folks by PM. Suffice to say, what I saw really was very un-mysterious and clearly 'of this world'.
I was told I may have seen a Typhoon etc etc, but I see them daily and I know what I'm looking at when it comes to 'regular' military planes. I've lived on the doorstep of RAF installations my whole life.
But anyways, this story is making big news today and I'm wondering what people think.
BBC NEWS | England | Lincolnshire | UFO claim over wind farm damage
UFO hits wind turbine | The Sun |News|UFOs
The wind farm is, by pure coincidence, at Conisholme.
And just for the record, I don't think for a minute that a flying saucer caused this, nor am I saying a UAV smashed into the turbine. Just pondering.
And in case any journos are reading - no, I'm not gonna talk to you. There are plenty of folks who've seen these around here just lately. Rational witnesses are easy to find, but I apppreciate that sweet little old ladies with digital cameras talking about flying octupus-like creatures from Mars will sell more papers.
Last edited by harrogate; 8th Jan 2009 at 09:37.
The BBC report includes:-
Not investigating because they know the culprit was neither hostile nor unauthorised? 
The Ministry of Defence said it was not looking into the incident.
A spokesman said: "The MoD examines reports solely to establish whether UK airspace may have been compromised by hostile or unauthorised military activity.
"Unless there's evidence of a potential threat, there's no attempt to identify the nature of each sighting reported."
A spokesman said: "The MoD examines reports solely to establish whether UK airspace may have been compromised by hostile or unauthorised military activity.
"Unless there's evidence of a potential threat, there's no attempt to identify the nature of each sighting reported."
Idle curiosity, why were you out on the coast at 3am?
Additionally the culprit appears atop the photo of the turbine in The Sun's article and it appears to be the figure from 'The Saint'. Times are hard and a (pipe-cleaner) mans gotta do what he can to make ends meet..
SHJ
Why ponder about it? If you believe that the two stories are not linked then why not just post on your original thread?
http://www.pprune.org/military-aircr...le-humber.html
Wind Turbine damage through blade and structural failures.
http://www.caithnesswindfarms.co.uk/accidents.pdf
Wind Turbine Accident data
'Blade failure
By far the biggest number of incidents found were due to blade failure. “Blade failure” can arise from a number of possible sources, and results in either whole blades or pieces of blade being thrown from the turbine. A total of 139 separate incidences were found:
Pieces of blade are documented as travelling over 400m, typically from much smaller turbines than those proposed for use today. In Germany, blade pieces have gone through the roofs and walls of nearby buildings. This is why CWIF believe that there should be a minimum distance of at least 2km between turbines and occupied housing – in line with other European countries - in order to adequately address public safety and other issues including noise and shadow flicker.
.....
Structural failure
From the data obtained, this is the third most common accident cause, with 60 instances found. “Structural failure” is assumed to be major component failure under conditions which components should be designed to withstand. This mainly concerns storm damage to turbines and tower collapse. However, poor quality control, lack of maintenance and component failure can also be responsible.'
Watch the UFO media call 'cover up' when the fault is found to be a mechanical failure?!
http://www.pprune.org/military-aircr...le-humber.html
Wind Turbine damage through blade and structural failures.
http://www.caithnesswindfarms.co.uk/accidents.pdf
Wind Turbine Accident data
'Blade failure
By far the biggest number of incidents found were due to blade failure. “Blade failure” can arise from a number of possible sources, and results in either whole blades or pieces of blade being thrown from the turbine. A total of 139 separate incidences were found:
Pieces of blade are documented as travelling over 400m, typically from much smaller turbines than those proposed for use today. In Germany, blade pieces have gone through the roofs and walls of nearby buildings. This is why CWIF believe that there should be a minimum distance of at least 2km between turbines and occupied housing – in line with other European countries - in order to adequately address public safety and other issues including noise and shadow flicker.
.....
Structural failure
From the data obtained, this is the third most common accident cause, with 60 instances found. “Structural failure” is assumed to be major component failure under conditions which components should be designed to withstand. This mainly concerns storm damage to turbines and tower collapse. However, poor quality control, lack of maintenance and component failure can also be responsible.'
Watch the UFO media call 'cover up' when the fault is found to be a mechanical failure?!
Last edited by TEEEJ; 8th Jan 2009 at 11:53.
It must have been the Police helicopter that clipped the windfarm as it was following you at 3am to the shoreline as you tried to bury the bodies of the aliens that crashed a few weeks ago...
Surely, if you know the rotation speed of the turbine and look closely enough at the damage to the blades, you can work out the speed that the "object" went through the blades at??? Any keen aircrew students want to work that one out for teacher???
SB
Surely, if you know the rotation speed of the turbine and look closely enough at the damage to the blades, you can work out the speed that the "object" went through the blades at??? Any keen aircrew students want to work that one out for teacher???
SB
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: X:0 Y:0 Z:0 (relative to myself obviously)
Posts: 115
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Surely, if you know the rotation speed of the turbine
Does that not depend on the windspeed at the time...?
Oh, and don't call me Shirley.
What the little old lady witnessed.
UFOs crashing into wind farms: has the Guardian solved the mystery? | Media | guardian.co.uk
'Emily Bell, would like to make it clear that her family had no part in damaging any of those 65ft multimillion-pound turbine blades - but she can help explain those "massive balls of light with tentacles going right down to the ground", as one onlooker described them to the Sun.
Those mysterious lights were actually the fireworks Emily's brother Tim had bought at the local garden centre for the 80th birthday party of dad Peter Bell. "It was a medium-sized fireworks display with absolutely no ballistics, and the fireworks were mostly dropping over my parents' house. But we were laughing that we could have broken the wind turbine," jested Emily.'
UFOs crashing into wind farms: has the Guardian solved the mystery? | Media | guardian.co.uk
'Emily Bell, would like to make it clear that her family had no part in damaging any of those 65ft multimillion-pound turbine blades - but she can help explain those "massive balls of light with tentacles going right down to the ground", as one onlooker described them to the Sun.
Those mysterious lights were actually the fireworks Emily's brother Tim had bought at the local garden centre for the 80th birthday party of dad Peter Bell. "It was a medium-sized fireworks display with absolutely no ballistics, and the fireworks were mostly dropping over my parents' house. But we were laughing that we could have broken the wind turbine," jested Emily.'
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Between a rock and a hard place
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
YouTube - Windmill/Wind Turbine Explosion
The above shows a windmill self destructing in a gale.
In the last few weeks there's barely been a breath of wind.
Curiouser and curiouser...
The above shows a windmill self destructing in a gale.
In the last few weeks there's barely been a breath of wind.
Curiouser and curiouser...
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The 'Dunawee' Home for the Elderly.
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by AR1
Sounds like they're using WP on Humberside now!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Leeds
Posts: 702
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Teej - I tried posting on the original thread twice this morning, but after I submitted the post, the thread remained unchanged on both occasions. It doesn't appear to be locked, so I just assumed it was some admin related jiggery-pokery preventing more posts being added.
Back to the plot, I'm still only pondering the issue. It's probably no coincidence that it was the coldest night of the year so far (at that point) on the night the turbine failed, so we're probably looking at ice/temperature related failures, because there wasn't a breath of wind that night. This also means the blades wouldn't have been turning much - if at all - so it's possible falling chunks of ice could've come into play somewhere. There had been some light rain during the day too, so there could conceivably have been some substantial ice formations on the turbines. The talk in the papers of a 'missing' blade is nonsense. Just because the alleged witnesses didn't see it, doesn't mean it wasn't there. It was there. Laid on the ground close by.
They claim to be certain that the blades struck something. It could have been blade-on-blade or ice hitting the blades, but it'll be interesting to see if they think the failure was caused by a contact, rather than a contact being a side effect of the failure.
I'm personally not interested in UFO claims and all that crap. But I do like to ponder some slightly more feasible theories.
As for being out on the shoreline at 3am as mentioned in my first post, as I said in PMs to other members when I first posted, we were awoken by the sound of a flotilla of tugs in the Humber estuary. We had no idea what the hell the noise from their engines was. After at first thinking it was out plumbing or heating, we went outside and noticed it coming from the direction of the sea. We hopped in the car and were completely underwhelmed when we realised it was just ship engines. I've never noticed the sound carry as well as it did that night. But that's when we saw the UAV. Quite unremarkable in many ways, but almost definitely a UAV. It was well lit in the moonlight and we watched it for probably 2 minutes until it went out of view. No lights, slow, not high and not much sound, but not a 'regular' plane.
Back to the plot, I'm still only pondering the issue. It's probably no coincidence that it was the coldest night of the year so far (at that point) on the night the turbine failed, so we're probably looking at ice/temperature related failures, because there wasn't a breath of wind that night. This also means the blades wouldn't have been turning much - if at all - so it's possible falling chunks of ice could've come into play somewhere. There had been some light rain during the day too, so there could conceivably have been some substantial ice formations on the turbines. The talk in the papers of a 'missing' blade is nonsense. Just because the alleged witnesses didn't see it, doesn't mean it wasn't there. It was there. Laid on the ground close by.
They claim to be certain that the blades struck something. It could have been blade-on-blade or ice hitting the blades, but it'll be interesting to see if they think the failure was caused by a contact, rather than a contact being a side effect of the failure.
I'm personally not interested in UFO claims and all that crap. But I do like to ponder some slightly more feasible theories.
As for being out on the shoreline at 3am as mentioned in my first post, as I said in PMs to other members when I first posted, we were awoken by the sound of a flotilla of tugs in the Humber estuary. We had no idea what the hell the noise from their engines was. After at first thinking it was out plumbing or heating, we went outside and noticed it coming from the direction of the sea. We hopped in the car and were completely underwhelmed when we realised it was just ship engines. I've never noticed the sound carry as well as it did that night. But that's when we saw the UAV. Quite unremarkable in many ways, but almost definitely a UAV. It was well lit in the moonlight and we watched it for probably 2 minutes until it went out of view. No lights, slow, not high and not much sound, but not a 'regular' plane.
Last edited by harrogate; 8th Jan 2009 at 14:24.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London, New York, Paris, Moscow.
Posts: 3,632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not uav's or ufo's but had the same surprising sound propagation from the Middle of the Firth of Forth when the Navy were surveying out in the firth. Turns out a stratum of rock ran out from the middle of the firth and under Cellardyke and the sound from the geological survey carried along that.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Horsham, England, UK. ---o--O--o---
Posts: 1,185
Received 4 Likes
on
2 Posts
Maybe the flying "Triangle" was one of these:-
Bae must be testing them somewhere?
Bae must be testing them somewhere?
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Devon, England
Posts: 816
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Aren't UAV operations limited to airspace which is NOTAM'd for their operation?
For example, when BAE Systems are testing various UAV's around Barrow and Campbeltown, NOTAM's have been posted showing the area they are testing them.
There are some issued now:-
"RESTRICTED AREA (TEMPORARY) AT WALNEY ISLAND, CUMBRIA FOR A UAV TRIAL
WI THE AREA BOUNDED BY STRAIGHT LINES JOINING SUCCESSIVELY THE
FOLLOWING POINTS- blah blah blah"
I can't see a UAV whizzing around some of the most congested military airspace in the UK (Lincolnshire) without some kind of notice to other airmen, surely? OR Can they?
The only specified UAV operating airspace overland which will be permanent is that i thought being 'set up' south of SPTA for the Watchkeeper in a few years time.
The UFO spotters seem to be in overdrive around Lincolnshire lately, even spotting strange lights over Donna Nook.... where flares were being tested.
For example, when BAE Systems are testing various UAV's around Barrow and Campbeltown, NOTAM's have been posted showing the area they are testing them.
There are some issued now:-
"RESTRICTED AREA (TEMPORARY) AT WALNEY ISLAND, CUMBRIA FOR A UAV TRIAL
WI THE AREA BOUNDED BY STRAIGHT LINES JOINING SUCCESSIVELY THE
FOLLOWING POINTS- blah blah blah"
I can't see a UAV whizzing around some of the most congested military airspace in the UK (Lincolnshire) without some kind of notice to other airmen, surely? OR Can they?
The only specified UAV operating airspace overland which will be permanent is that i thought being 'set up' south of SPTA for the Watchkeeper in a few years time.
The UFO spotters seem to be in overdrive around Lincolnshire lately, even spotting strange lights over Donna Nook.... where flares were being tested.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Leeds
Posts: 702
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The controlled low level airspace of a weapons range at 3am could conceivably be regarded as a relatively safe bet without a NOTAM though, maybe? But why not NOTAM it? Don't see the need to keep it secret really, unless they're doing something they don't really want us to know about I suppose. But what could be so secret about using a UAV over the land in the UK, other than flying it around? Can't imagine it'd be anything too exciting.
The wind farm lies slap bang on the 'commute' from Donna to Waddington. Bang on it. It's intriguing, but just an observation.
For the record, the delta Raven looks a hell of a lot like what we saw.
The wind farm lies slap bang on the 'commute' from Donna to Waddington. Bang on it. It's intriguing, but just an observation.
For the record, the delta Raven looks a hell of a lot like what we saw.
Looking at the images it looks like Lesley Whittingham has witnessed a Sundog. A simple combination of unrelated events that has resulted in a media flap.
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2009/...74_468x327.jpg
'Lesley Whittingham (71), from Jerusalem Cottages, Alkborough, described seeing bright orange and yellow tints in the air at around 1.30pm on Saturday.
"It looked like a giant explosion in the sky and I was really surprised," she said. Mrs Whittingham watched from her upstairs window with her husband Frank (78) as the stationary object was seen for five minutes before mysteriously disappearing.
"I saw my next-door neighbour and pointed it out, but by that time it was fading," she added.After grabbing her camera to catch the phenomenon on film, Mrs Whittingham said she showed the pictures to her friends who were also stumped as to what it could be. "It's my first UFO sighting but it reminds me of planes hitting in wartime," she added'
Sun dog - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
YouTube - Sundog Splendor! with Deep Heaven by David Nevue
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2009/...74_468x327.jpg
'Lesley Whittingham (71), from Jerusalem Cottages, Alkborough, described seeing bright orange and yellow tints in the air at around 1.30pm on Saturday.
"It looked like a giant explosion in the sky and I was really surprised," she said. Mrs Whittingham watched from her upstairs window with her husband Frank (78) as the stationary object was seen for five minutes before mysteriously disappearing.
"I saw my next-door neighbour and pointed it out, but by that time it was fading," she added.After grabbing her camera to catch the phenomenon on film, Mrs Whittingham said she showed the pictures to her friends who were also stumped as to what it could be. "It's my first UFO sighting but it reminds me of planes hitting in wartime," she added'
Sun dog - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
YouTube - Sundog Splendor! with Deep Heaven by David Nevue