UFO Conjectures

Tuesday, September 11, 2018

The Socorro "UFO" explained!?

From Jose Caravaca:

http://www.nmsr.org/socorro.htm

posted by RRRGroup at Tuesday, September 11, 2018

15 Comments:

  • No, the Socorro "UFO" was not a Lunar Excursion Module. How many reasons do you need to dismiss this bullshit explanation?

    1). The Socorro incident occurred in April of 1964. There were no functioning LEMs in 1964. In 1964 they were still trying to figure out how many legs the LEM should have. The first functioning LEM flew in orbit in 1967.

    2) The LEM was actually a two stage vehicle. It descended to the Lunar surface as a single, integrated stack. When it came time to take off and ascend back to Lunar orbit, the upper stage took off and left the first stage behind, as a kind of launch pad. The Socorro object, whatever it was, left nothing behind but footprints and a burning bush.

    3) The LEM was entirely incapable of landing or taking off in Earth's gravity. It was designed to operate in Lunar gravity, which is 1/6 that of Earth's. The rocket engine thrust was sized for Lunar gravity, not Earth gravity.

    4) The LEM was not capable of flying at any substantial speed in the Earth's atmosphere. It was designed to operate only in the vacuum of space. It was not intended nor was it capable of withstanding the aerodynamic forces and torques that would occur when flying inside the Earth's atmosphere.

    5) If the Socorro object was the LEM, what happened to it when it when it flew out of sight? Did it land somewhere out in the desert? The LEM upper stage had no capability to land; no landing gear, no height finding radar, etc. Did it crash? Why was no fire or crater ever discovered? What would have happened to the crew members on board? Why would crew members ever agree to go on what amounted to a suicide flight?

    6) The LEM was never at White Sands. Even if you ignore all the above, why would you test fly a LEM out in the traffic pattern of a civilian airport when the controlled airspace of a government test range was available?

    Other than that, it's a perfect fit.

    Jeeze

    By Blogger Larry, at Wednesday, September 12, 2018  

  • Hahahaha....Larry don't blow a gasket.

    It's only a supposition floated online.

    But you know, I'm sure, that Hughes Aircraft was testing landing vehicles for moon landings using the CIA cover group, Raven Industries, in the 1964 time-frame.

    You will find information at my RRRGRoup.blogspot.com blog by using the search spot in the upper left corner of the blog.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Wednesday, September 12, 2018  

  • Yes, Rich I know you believe that.

    But the CIA would have had to play by the same laws of Physics that NASA used. That means that the same criticisms would apply.

    1) Any manned Lunar lander that was around the same size as the LEM would be a two stage vehicle. That means that part of it would have been left behind.

    2) A manned Lunar lander would not have been capable of landing and taking off in Earth's gravity field.

    3) The ascent stage would not have been able to land somewhere else.

    Etc., Etc.

    This kind of explanation just doesn't make physical sense regardless of whether NASA, the CIA, or the Bilderberg Group is your favorite explanation.

    I know you like conjectures in order to stretch the imagination. But some conjectures are provably wrong.

    By Blogger Larry, at Thursday, September 13, 2018  

  • Thanks, Larry.

    I agree with your assessment pretty much.

    That damned Socorro incident is one of the best witnessed account of something odd.

    I'd be very interested in your view (conjecture) about what Zamora experienced.

    I'd put it online, here, as a posting from you.

    Rich

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Thursday, September 13, 2018  

  • Rich:

    I can't say with any confidence what the Socorro object WAS, but as a highly educated and experienced NASA Aerospace Engineer (retired) I can write a comprehensive essay explaining what the object was NOT, with high confidence. This is an essay that I have been telling myself I was going to write for some time. Maybe this is a good excuse to sit down and do it. If that would meet the general idea of your invitation, I'll take you up on it.

    You'll have to tell me where to email it to you.

    By Blogger Larry, at Thursday, September 13, 2018  

  • Thanks Larry, it would be a truly welcome piece.

    Send to rrrgroup@gmail.com

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Thursday, September 13, 2018  

  • We've heard all of Larry's objections a dozen times and none of them hold water.

    Bell had a two-man free-flying LLRV demonstrator in 1963 and Bell operated at White Sands. It most closely matches Zamora's description. And if wasn't that, it was a Lunar Surveyor tester attached to the side of a helicopter that was being tested on that very day in 1964 at the northern extent of White Sands.

    Those are the most likely real-world explanations for what Zamora described.

    Telling us why it could NOT have been those things based on ignoring the facts and your make-it-up mumbo-jumbo is simply appealing to ignorance. It's Irrational!

    Which is most plausible, real-world space technology at a test range or a known "UFO" contrarian's mumbo jumbo?

    By Blogger zoamchomsky, at Sunday, September 16, 2018  

  • "Describing the craft, he said that it had markings on it similar to what Boeing puts on its planes."

    https://yt3.ggpht.com/a-/AN66SAw6uOR-IAOqHcO1uUsnYSwAcp9fPCJRCOyfAw=s900-mo-c-c0xffffffff-rj-k-no

    Oh, you mean like the NASA logo?

    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e5/NASA_logo.svg/2000px-NASA_logo.svg.png

    By Blogger zoamchomsky, at Sunday, September 16, 2018  

  • In 1965 a third-hand "witness" to Socorro sees a picture of the LM, or what they say was identified as the LM, and jumps to the conclusion that it, the Grumman LM of 1965, was what Zamora saw.

    Given that, isn't it more probable that what Zamora saw was some actually existing thing that resembled the proposed LM of 1965 in form but could perform in the way he described?

    By Blogger zoamchomsky, at Monday, September 17, 2018  

  • "Bell had a two-man free-flying LLRV demonstrator in 1963 and Bell operated at White Sands."

    Bell was awarded the contract in feb. 1963. They didn't have a functioning model.

    http://www.astronautix.com/a/apollollrv.html

    "The two LLRV's were shipped from Bell to the FRC [at Edwards Air Force Base] in Apr. 1964".
    " It was first readied for captured flight on a tilt table constructed at the FRC to test the engines without actually flying. The scene then shifted to the old South Base area of Edwards. On the day of the first flight, Oct. 30, 1964,.."

    It wasn't at White Sands in 1964 and it wasn't flying yet when Zamorra saw whatever he saw. There is no indication either that the LLRVs were housed inside a ballon-like cover.

    By Blogger Yvan Defoy, at Monday, September 17, 2018  

  • The free-flying Bell 1963 LLRV demonstrator.

    https://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/10/20/article-2468895-18DB6F8000000578-154_964x1145.jpg

    And Bell would hardly have delivered the first two production LLRVs to Edwards AFB in 1964 without first testing others. As part of an ongoing series of contracts for LLRV development, what was Bell doing for over a year from 1963 to April 1964?

    "After conceptual planning and meetings with engineers from Bell Aerosystems, Buffalo, New York, a company with experience in vertical takeoff and landing (VTOL) aircraft, NASA issued Bell a $50,000 study contract in December 1961. Bell had independently conceived a similar, free-flying simulator, and out of this study came the NASA Headquarters' endorsement of the LLRV concept, resulting in a $3.6 million production contract awarded to Bell on February 1, 1963, for delivery of the first of two vehicles for flight studies at the FRC within 14 months."

    By Blogger zoamchomsky, at Monday, September 17, 2018  

  • "And Bell would hardly have delivered the first two production LLRVs to Edwards AFB in 1964 without first testing others. "

    Anything factual to back the speculation that in april 1964 Bell had a functional LLRV in NM capable of carrying two, a prototype superior to the vehicle delivered at Edwards AFB that same month ?

    By Blogger Yvan Defoy, at Monday, September 17, 2018  

  • Except for being able to place a 1963 Bell free-flying LLRV demonstrator in NM, all the rest has been shown. We don't have access to records of all that went on at Bell White Sands in 1964, so this hypothesis remains in the realm of speculation.

    But nothing about Zamora's report required technology beyond what existed in 1964.

    By Blogger zoamchomsky, at Tuesday, September 18, 2018  

  • Great-looking blog, Claude! Cool title. Graphics intensive. I recommend it to all saucer fans.

    http://thesaucersthattimeforgot.blogspot.com/

    By Blogger zoamchomsky, at Thursday, September 20, 2018  

  • Tks for the good word on the blog. Curt Collins writes it all. Me, I like to search newspapers DBs and see where it leads.

    By Blogger Yvan Defoy, at Saturday, October 13, 2018  

Post a Comment

<< Home