Matthew, before embarking in an enquiry you need to do some groundwork. That’s what enables you to discard the elements that aren’t worth any effort and formulate a plan with proper lines of research. Here’s a short reading list that will help:

We are Bellingcat by Eliot Higgins. If you are not already familiar with it, have a good look at the Bellingcat website as well.

Spying on the Bomb by Jeffrey T Richelson A good primer on the use of open source intelligence.

I note with interest that one of Dr Clarke’s main interests is in “Contemporary Legend”.

YS

According to Occam, the most likely explanation is that someone took a picture of a passing Harrier without noticing that a kid was flying a kite in the foreground.

Nick Pope didn't have ET visitors?

With respect to several other comments, we have no preconceived ideas one way or the other. UFO was used by me as a popularly understood term of reference purely in the literal sense of the MoD files apparently showing a flying object that remains publicly unidentified. I have not suggested that aliens were visiting Scotland in 1990.

With respect to our groundwork, as others have correctly indicated, we're up against official secrecy and a 32-year history gap. We've found multiple witnesses who were somewhat involved, but many won't talk, others are quite elderly and understandably don't recall matters in great detail, and, of those who have spoken out, none have had a "smoking gun" or retained any revelatory evidence. Many other key witnesses are dead, including the Daily Record's then-editor and photo editor. Moreover, the state appears to have destroyed almost all the evidence it once possessed, it might not be being truthful about other aspects of the case, and it is still covering up key details by actively preventing the release of information from the National Archives until 2076.

Overall, we are pursuing multiple lines of enquiry, a minor one of which is to solicit new and useful responses on public fora, some of which we were grateful to receive from members of PPRuNe. Hopefully, other witnesses will come forward, or our other avenues of research may bear fruit. Given the circumstances and the passage of time, though, we accept that the odds are against us.

Elsewhere, Davef68's comments re: a privately operated UAV seem reasonable to me and I will look into that angle. Thank you for that suggestion.

Why the interest?

Hi BFM,

I presume this was to me.

I have always enjoyed mysteries and this seemed to fit the bill. The photos, according to Nick Pope, are the "best ever" of a UFO (however that word is interpreted) ever taken.

That seemed to be a good enough reason to take a look.

​​​​​​​All the best.

The only pictures I can find are the one posted in this thread and ones of the ac and object in the self same orientation but with a different landscape. I note that in the most popular image, that published in this thread, the object is more sharply focussed than anything else in the picture. It looks like it has either been retouched or is an artist’s impression. Is that actually the real picture?

https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....9ab65918a.jpeg


The UAV/Drone people are hinting at are Corax and Raven - some photos here: https://ukdefenceforum.net/viewtopic.php?t=370

Howevet, these were pretty small having seen them. Around 15ft wingspan at the most. They led to the full sized Taranis that is about the size of a BAe Hawk. However, these are 21st century aircraft.


https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....59fccbd29.jpeg

Hello. We have been told by multiple people directly involved that 6 clear, full-colour photos were taken. The photographer supposedly sent all 6 negatives to the Daily Record. "The best" of the 6 was printed and sent to the RAF in Scotland for comment. This was forwarded to the MOD, and then the newspaper, at MOD's request, sent on the negatives for analysis. They were allegedly returned to the newspaper, which itself claims to have no record of them. After the passage of decades, and the transfer to digital imagery, that's not particularly unbelievable, especially as they never printed the story. They may even have sent them back to the photographer who has maintained his silence ever since he was interviewed by the military.

Again, to the best of our knowledge, the black and white image is a very low quality scan of a photocopy (perhaps of another photocopy) of just a fraction of 1 of the 6 photos.

Every colour image online is a recreation to our knowledge.

That does not boost confidence on the picture at hand. Considering the 90's photocopy and scanning technology including zoom we could be looking at just about anything.
Timelord: have you actually seen an original color version without any zoom? What is your recollection compared to the recreated versions? Which are recreated out of someones (Nick Popes) memory so I would not give much credit to it as memories fade and people tend to emphasize what they think they saw/heard/thought.

Beamer, It was a long time ago, but my recollection is that the copy I saw was black and white. It was sharp, on glossy photo paper ( not a photocopy) and looked authentic. The mock up on line is a pretty accurate recreation but I think the “object” was lower and not exactly side on. My impression at the time was that the circling aircraft was a Hunter but it could have been a Harrier.

I was a UFO sceptic, but the picture was enough to give me pause for thought . The story that Mathew Illsley tells makes it even more interesting. It may have been a fake, but it was certainly not any aircraft revealed before or since or a blimp / balloon/ kite etc.

But I assume not all of them featured the RAF chase aircraft, just the mystery object in question.

Re the negatives, all you can say definitively is that their whereabouts are unknown (to you and your colleagues). Anything more is speculation which could undermine the credibility of the investigation.

Final comment about the MoD seeking to retain the redacted elements of their report until 2076. Whilst I understand there may be a desire to read into the existence of some nefarious scheme to hide 'the truth' from the public, there is often a more mundane, down-to-Earth explanation regarding national security. Don't forget the Govt didn't reveal the activities of Station X until the mid 90s, due in a large part to the groundbreaking work they did their which formed the basis for western intelligence gathering for the next 50 years.

I noted that earlier in the thread. This could explain why the 12 former Harrier pilots had no recollection i.e. asking the wrong people? Who were flying Hunters at this time?

Then you will know that he wasn't operating the 'UFO desk' like people try to make out but was just a glorified clerical officer who filed things.
I still have a photocopy of the list of duties carried out in that section but I can't reveal it because of the OSA.

The F117 was known about before the invasion of Kuwait. There were pictures of it in the aviation press in 1989. I was sitting by the pool at the compound I lived in in Saudi when a KC10 and 2 F117's broke overhead for Khamis, just after the invasion, and we all knew what they were.

Agreed. My role gave me excellent access and, as I meant to imply, nothing I saw or heard suggested any ET activity.

Still a few about - 237 OCU at Lossie had some two seaters and there was a mix of two and single seaters at A&AEE/ETPS/RAE.

Hello.

Yes, the negatives' location (nay, continued existence) is publicly unknown and unknown to us, too. I'm trying not to speculate, but perhaps my words aren't as accurate as I intended them to be.
A directly involved source has told us the Daily Record made 6 colour photos from the negatives.
A directly involved source has told us that the RAF was sent at least 1 of these colour photos and that the MoD received all the negatives.
A directly involved source has told us that Nick Pope's claim about the Calvine poster being on the wall was true.
We know, again from directly involved sources, of two important documents (not including the photos themselves, JARIC analysis, etc.) that were made during the course of the RAF's and Defence Intel's investigations that were not included in the released files and which are now presumed deliberately destroyed.

Just to clarify, the MoD/National Archives insist that there are no other Calvine-related (or UFO-related for that matter) files in existence, and that EVERYTHING has been released. They say that the ONLY thing they're keeping secret now is the FOIA Section 40 material in the released files (names, addresses, job titles, etc). They used to release these without any problem (you can see even the names and addresses of children who allegedly saw UFOs in the 60s and 70s in the files, names and phone numbers and job titles of civil servants, etc), but since DPA/GDPR/FOIA, the shutters have come down.

Hi Matthew

You are presumably aware that some years ago the MoD released/declassified a UFO report in which the only major redaction was one entry on a list of possible US aircraft that could be mistaken for extra terrestrial craft. From memory, the list included the SR-71 and F-117.

You are also presumably aware that there are RAF aircrew who have seen unidentified aircraft (not aliens) in UK airspace, at least one of whom mentions it in his autobiography.

It might be helpful to FOIA for the redacted identity of the aircraft in the report. This might have absolutely nothing to do with do with the Calvine incident, but as others have indicated, there is much we don't know about "black" aerospace programmes from that time, and a 'worldly' explanation is much more likely that an 'other-worldy' one.

The area itself makes no sense to be stooging around at apparently low level in broad daylight in an unusual aircraft with a chase plane. Why Calvine? Somewhere in the area of Spadeadam might have made some sort of sense

Machrihanish is mentioned but I do not see why. There seem to be no reports of odd looking aircraft though Campbeltown is close by.

There is no mention of any other sightings on that day from anywhere else or by anyone else. If a thing really was that odd, surely there should be other sighting reports of it in transit?