Which plane has a very loud sound? What is an air pocket? Flying on an airplane. Turbulence is normal

Small drones aircrafts Every year they become more and more widespread - they are used in the filming of television shows and music videos, for patrolling territories, or just for fun. Flying drones does not require special permission, and their cost is constantly decreasing. As a result, aviation authorities in some countries decided to study whether these devices pose a danger to passenger aircraft. The results of the first studies were contradictory, but in general regulators came to the conclusion that the flights of private drones should be brought under control.

In July 2015, a Lufthansa plane landing at Warsaw Airport nearly collided with a multicopter, flying less than a hundred meters away. In April 2016, pilots passenger plane British Airways, which landed at London Airport, reported to air traffic controllers that it had collided with a drone during landing. Later, however, the investigation came to the conclusion that there was no drone, and what the pilots took for it was most likely an ordinary package lifted by the wind from the ground. However, already in July 2017, at the British Gatwick airport, a plane almost collided with a drone, after which air traffic controllers were forced to close one runway for landing and redirect five flights to reserve strips.

According to the British research organization UK Airprox Board, in 2016 in the UK there were 71 cases of dangerous encounters between passenger aircraft and drones. A dangerous proximity in aviation is considered to be the approach of an aircraft with another aircraft at a distance of less than 150 meters. Since the beginning of this year, 64 cases of drones approaching aircraft in the UK have already been recorded. In the US, last year aviation authorities recorded just under 200 cases of dangerous proximity. At the same time, aviation authorities still have a poor idea of ​​exactly how dangerous small drones can be for passenger aircraft. Some experts previously assumed that a collision with a drone for a passenger airliner would be no more dangerous than a regular bird strike.

According to the specialized publication Aviation Week & Space Technology, since 1998, 219 people have died worldwide due to mid-air collisions between passenger flights and birds, with a significant proportion of them flying in small private aircraft. However, every year airlines around the world spend a total of $625–650 million to repair damage to passenger aircraft due to bird strikes. By the way, in general passenger liners are considered resistant to direct hits from birds. When developing and testing new aircraft, special checks are even carried out - the aircraft is fired at with the carcasses of various birds (ducks, geese, chickens) to determine its resistance to such damage. Checking engines for birds being thrown into them is generally mandatory.

In mid-March last year, researchers from the American George Mason University announced that the threat of drones to aviation has been greatly exaggerated. They studied bird strike statistics from 1990 to 2014, including incidents that resulted in fatalities. As a result, scientists came to the conclusion that the real probability of a dangerous collision between a drone and an airplane is not so high: just one case in 187 million years should end in a large-scale disaster.

To try to determine whether drones actually pose a threat to passenger aircraft, aviation authorities in the European Union and the United Kingdom commissioned two independent studies in 2016. The engineers who conduct these studies shoot various drone designs or drone parts at different parts of the aircraft to produce real-life damage that passenger aircraft might suffer in a collision. In parallel, mathematical modeling of such collisions is carried out. The research is carried out in several stages, the first of which have already been completed, and the results are presented to customers. It is expected that after the work is fully completed, aviation authorities will develop new rules for the registration and operation of drones by private individuals.

A drone crashes into the windshield of a passenger plane during testing in the UK.

Today at different countries There are no uniform rules for drone flights. Thus, in the UK there is no requirement to register and license drones weighing less than 20 kilograms. Moreover, these devices must fly within the operator’s line of sight. Private drones with cameras are not allowed to fly within 50 meters of people, buildings or cars. In Italy, there are practically no special rules for drones, except for one thing - drones cannot be flown around large crowds of people. And in Ireland, for example, all drones weighing more than one kilogram must be registered with the Office civil aviation countries. By the way, in the European Union, Ireland is one of the ardent supporters of tightening the rules for the use of drones.

Meanwhile, while Europe plans to tighten the screws, in the United States, on the contrary, they intend to make drone flights more free. So, earlier this year, the US Federal Aviation Administration came to the conclusion that lightweight consumer quadcopters do not pose a big threat to aircraft, although their flights near airports are unacceptable. In February, American companies 3DR, Autodesk and Atkins already received permission to control drone flights at the world's busiest airport - International airport Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta, which annually handles about one hundred million passengers. Here quadcopters were used to compile 3D maps airport in high resolution. They carried out flights in the direct line of sight of the operator and under the control of air traffic controllers.

The results of the study were first published in October last year by a working group of the European Agency for aviation security. These researchers concluded that amateur drones do not pose a serious threat to passenger aircraft. During their work, the working group participants focused on studying the consequences of air collisions between passenger aircraft and drones weighing up to 25 kilograms. For the study, drones were divided into four categories: large (weighing more than 3.5 kilograms), medium (up to 1.5 kilograms), small (up to 0.5 kilograms) and “harmless” (up to 250 grams). For each category, experts determined the degree of danger, which was assessed on a five-point scale: 1-2 - high, 3-5 - low. Devices that received four to five points were considered safe.

To determine the degree of danger, the researchers used data on aircraft flight altitudes by category and took into account the likelihood of their occurrence in a single airspace with aircraft, as well as the results of computer and full-scale collision tests between drones and airliners. In addition, the individual degree of danger was assessed for each unmanned vehicle using four points: damage to the hull, threat to the lives of passengers, threat to the lives of the crew, threat of violation of the flight schedule. To simplify the assessment, the researchers carried out calculations for aircraft flying at a speed of 340 knots (630 kilometers per hour) at an altitude of three thousand meters or more and at a speed of 250 knots at a lower altitude.

Based on the results of all the calculations, the participants of the European working group came to the conclusion that small drones at an altitude of up to three thousand meters pose virtually no threat to passenger aircraft. The fact is that such devices rise to high altitudes, where they can collide with an airplane, extremely rarely. In addition, they have very little mass. Medium drones, according to experts, do not pose a serious threat to airliners. Only if a device weighing 1.5 kilograms (most amateur drones have this mass) collides with an aircraft at an altitude of more than three thousand meters, can it threaten flight safety. Large aircraft are recognized as dangerous for passenger aircraft at all flight altitudes.

Based on the results of full-scale tests, it turned out that in the event of a collision with drones, the windshields of airliners, nose cones, leading edges of the wing, and engines can receive the greatest damage. In general, damage from drones weighing up to 1.5 kilograms can be comparable to damage from birds, which aircraft regularly collide with in the air. Now European experts are preparing for an expanded study. This time, the damage that drones can cause to passenger aircraft engines will be studied, and the likelihood of batteries getting into technological holes will be assessed.

By the way, earlier scientists from Virginia Tech University conducted computer simulations of situations in which various drones fall into a running aircraft engine. The researchers came to the conclusion that devices weighing more than 3.6 kilograms pose a serious danger to engines. Once in the engine, they will destroy the fan blades and collapse themselves. Then fragments of the fan blades and drone will fall into the external air circuit, from where they will be thrown out, as well as into the internal circuit - the compressor, combustion chamber and turbine area. The speed of debris inside the engine can reach 1,150 kilometers per hour. Thus, if a drone weighing 3.6 kilograms collides during takeoff, the engine will completely stop working in less than a second.


Meanwhile, the results of the British study were summed up in the middle of this year - in July, the company that carried out the work, QinetiQ, submitted a report to the UK National Air Traffic Control Service. The study, conducted by a British company, used a specially designed air gun that fired drones and drone parts at predetermined speeds into the fronts of decommissioned planes and helicopters. Quadcopters weighing 0.4, 1.2 and 4 kilograms, as well as aircraft-type drones weighing up to 3.5 kilograms, were used for shooting. Based on the results of the shooting, experts came to the conclusion that any drones are dangerous for light aircraft and helicopters that do not have a special certificate for protection against bird strikes.

Passenger aircraft with bird protection can suffer serious damage from drones when flying at cruising speeds, which range from 700 to 890 kilometers per hour. The researchers considered serious damage to be the destruction of windshields in a collision with heavy parts of drones - metal parts of the body, camera and battery. These parts, breaking through the windshield, can fly into the cockpit, damage control panels and injure pilots. Devices weighing from two to four kilograms were considered dangerous for airliners. It should be noted that passenger aircraft develop cruising speed already at high altitude(usually about ten thousand meters), which amateur drones are simply unable to climb.

According to QinetiQ, drones weighing four kilograms can be dangerous for passenger aircraft at low flight speeds, such as during landing. At the same time, the severity of damage to the aircraft largely depends on the design of the drone. Thus, during tests it turned out that drones with a camera mounted on a gimbal under the body have little chance of breaking through the windshield of a passenger aircraft. The fact is that in a collision, the camera on the gimbal will hit the glass first, and then the drone body. In this case, the camera and its suspension will play the role of a kind of shock absorber, taking on part of the impact energy. British aviation authorities, who are pushing for a sharp tightening of drone flight regulations, are expected to commission additional research.

Some commercially produced drones today already have a geofencing function. This means that the device constantly updates a database of zones closed to drone flights. The drone simply will not take off in such an area. However, in addition to serial devices, there are also homemade drones that can fly into the airspace of airports. And there are quite a lot of them. In general, so far not a single case of a collision between an aircraft and a drone has been recorded, but this is just a matter of time. And even if small drones do not pose a serious threat to passenger aircraft, they can still have a negative impact on aviation, increasing the already considerable costs for companies to repair aircraft.

Vasily Sychev

Many people are afraid to fly by plane. Psychologists say that there is even such a thing as “aerophobia.” Patients with this diagnosis experience real horror at the mere thought of taking to the air. The strongest negative emotions are caused by getting into air pockets and turbulence. Such moments are unpleasant even for those who are not afraid of flying. However, pilots claim that this is actually quite common. a natural phenomenon, which can be explained in scientific language, and it will not bring any harm to airline passengers. Today we decided to tell you what it really is air pocket, and whether you should be afraid of it.

Explanation of the term

It is quite difficult for an ordinary person to understand what an air pocket actually is. Everyone understands that there are no highways or road surfaces in the sky, and, therefore, there cannot be any potholes. For example, when it comes to driving a car, it is absolutely clear to anyone that there may be an obstacle or a hole on the road that an experienced driver will be able to steer around. But what if you find yourself in an air pocket? Is it possible to bypass it? And how dangerous is it? We will answer all these questions in the following sections of the article. But let's understand this difficult topic gradually.

Scientists have long found out that air flows are heterogeneous. They have different directions, temperatures and even densities. All this affects airliners flying on certain routes. In the case when the plane encounters flows of lower temperature on the way, a complete illusion of a short-term fall is created. Then we usually say that the ship fell into an air pocket. However, in reality this is just an illusion, which can be easily explained with the help of modern science.

Downward and upward flows

To understand how air pockets form, it is necessary to gain a complete understanding of the movement of air currents. According to the laws of physics, heated air always rises, and cooled air falls down. Warm currents are called ascending; they always tend upward. And cold air is considered to be descending, and like a funnel, it pulls down everything that gets in its way.

It is precisely because of the movement of these flows that air pockets, so unloved by passengers, are formed during flight. They make travelers experience very unpleasant sensations that many cannot forget for a long time.

The principle of formation of air pockets

Despite the fact that the modern aircraft industry has long equipped its new airliners with an abundance of technological innovations designed to make the flight comfortable and safe, so far no one has been able to relieve passengers from the unpleasant sensations caused by descending air masses. So, the plane fell into an air pocket. What is happening to him at this moment?

Even during a flight in good conditions weather conditions the airliner may encounter a flow of cold air. Since it is descending, it begins to significantly slow down the aircraft’s ascent speed. It is noteworthy that in a straight line it goes with the same performance, but loses a little altitude. This usually only lasts a few moments.

The airliner then encounters an updraft, which begins to push it upward. This allows aircraft gain the same altitude and continue the flight as normal.

Passengers' feelings

It is quite difficult for those who have never been trapped in air pockets to understand what airplane passengers feel. Typically, people complain that they experience stomach cramps, nausea rising in the throat, and even weightlessness that lasts a fraction of a second. All this is accompanied by the illusion of falling, which is perceived as realistically as possible. The combination of sensations leads to uncontrollable fear, which in the future does not allow most people to calmly endure flights and causes aerophobia.

Should we panic?

Unfortunately, not even the most highly professional pilot will be able to avoid the air pocket. It is impossible to fly around it, and even the make and class of the aircraft cannot protect passengers from unpleasant experiences.

Pilots claim that at the moment they hit downdraft the plane temporarily loses control. But there is no need to panic because of this; such a situation lasts no more than a few seconds and, apart from unpleasant sensations, does not threaten travelers with anything.

However, you need to know that the airliner is under serious pressure in the air pocket. At this moment, the plane encounters “churning” or turbulence, which, in turn, adds to the unpleasant sensations for frightened passengers.

Briefly about turbulence

This phenomenon causes a lot of inconvenience to travelers, but in fact it is not dangerous and cannot lead to an airliner crash. It is believed that the load on an airplane during turbulence is no higher than on a car moving on a rough road.

A zone of turbulence is formed when air flows at different speeds meet. At this moment, vortex waves are formed, which cause “chatter”. It is noteworthy that on some routes turbulence occurs regularly. For example, when flying over mountains, the plane always shakes. Such zones can be quite long, and the “chumpiness” can last from several minutes to half an hour.

Causes of turbulence

We have already talked about the most common cause of bumpiness, but in addition to this, other factors can cause it. For example, an airliner flying ahead often contributes to the formation of vortices, and they, in turn, form a turbulence zone.

Not far from the surface of the earth, the air warms up unevenly, which is why vortex flows are created, which cause turbulence.

It is noteworthy that pilots compare flying in the clouds to driving on a highway with potholes and potholes. Therefore, in cloudy weather, passengers most often experience all the “delights” of flying in a shaking plane.

Dangers of Turbulence

Most passengers seriously believe that turbulence can compromise the seal of the cabin and lead to a crash. But in fact, this is the safest phenomenon of all. The history of air transportation does not know of a case when getting into a bumpy situation would lead to fatal consequences.

Aircraft designers always put a certain margin of safety into the aircraft body, which can easily withstand both turbulence and thunderstorms. Of course, such a phenomenon causes anxiety, unpleasant emotions and even panic among passengers. But in fact, you just need to calmly wait out this moment, without giving in to your own fear.

How to behave during a flight: a few simple rules

If you are very afraid of flying, and thoughts about air pockets and turbulence make you feel terrible, then try to follow a number of simple rules that will significantly ease your condition:

  • do not drink alcohol during the flight, it will only aggravate unpleasant emotions;
  • try to drink water with lemon, it will relieve attacks of nausea when you get into air pockets;
  • before traveling, set yourself up in a positive mood, otherwise you will always be tormented by forebodings and negative emotions;
  • be sure to fasten your seat belts; passengers may be injured while passing through the turbulence zone;
  • if you are very afraid of flying, then choose larger aircraft models that are less sensitive to various types of shaking.

We hope that after reading our article, your fear of flying will become less acute, and your next air travel It will be easy and pleasant.

Conventional piston aircraft with wings and empennage form part of the UFO mystery. Although international law requires all aircraft to display markings and tail numbers on their planes, tail fins and fuselages, none of these mysterious aircraft adhere to the above rules. They are usually gloomy gray or black in color and have no identifying marks. In flap areas they can often be seen walking towards low altitude, and the pilot's cabin is always brightly lit, which does not correspond to the usual practice of night flights, since the light in the cabin interferes with the pilot's visual observation.

Since 1896, these "pirate" planes have been spotted in various places around the world. This gives reason to believe that they are interested in our entire planet as a whole. On Monday, July 22, 1968, at about 2 p.m., one of these aircraft appeared in the cloudless sky above the San Carlos de Bariloche airport in the vicinity of the city of Bahia Blanca (Argentina). It circled lazily over the airfield at 200 feet, as if preparing to land.

A large number of witnesses, including pilots, police officers and airport employees, dropped everything and began to watch the unexpected visitor. Of course, the plane's arrival in broad daylight major airport- an event that is unlikely to be of much interest to anyone, but there was something strange about this car. Even very strange.

Subsequently, all witnesses in their testimony agreed that this aircraft had an unusually long fuselage, and its delta-shaped wings seemed too short to keep a car of this size in the air. And yet he flew very slowly, so slowly that it was simply incredible how he could stay in the air. One of the fundamental laws of aerodynamics states that the shorter an airplane's wings are relative to its overall length, the faster it must fly to maintain wing lift.

The airport control tower attempted to contact the aircraft by radio, but received no response. Then the green signal lights were lit, giving permission to land. However, the giant car continued to circle over the airport. Having reached the end of runway 28, the plane suddenly turned 360 degrees around its axis, almost in place. Amazed spectators, watching the maneuvers of the mysterious machine from the ground through binoculars, could not see any identifying marks on its sides, except for three small and one large black squares. None of the airport workers could even identify the type of aircraft, although they were familiar with all existing classes of aircraft from the Constellation to the U-2, not to mention the fact that they had all the necessary reference books at hand. The plane seemed to be hovering rather than flying, making a soft whistling sound. A few minutes later the car picked up speed and disappeared in a southeast direction.

Argentine authorities have been unable to provide any explanation for this incident. On July 25, 1968, this story appeared on the pages of the newspaper LA RAZON, and was later investigated by the Englishwoman Edith Grainet, an employee of the FLYING SOS REVIEW magazine. In 1968, the entire area of ​​the town of Vaia Blanca became the site of extensive UFO sightings. There were reports of both landings and contacts.

A whole formation of unidentified delta-wing machines was seen over the United States and even received special study from the untrustworthy Air Force. PROJECT BLUE BOOK REPORT 14 states the following under “Unidentified Objects”:

“A naval aviation school cadet, his wife and several other persons on Sunday, April 20, 1952, were in an outdoor summer cinema for motorists at a show that lasted from 21.15 to 22.40. During the show, they noticed nine groups of objects flying directly above them. each group had from two to nine objects, and one group consisted of twenty objects. These objects flew in a straight course, at the same time changing it with a regular airplane turn. They resembled ordinary ones in shape. jet planes.

What was unusual about them was that each was surrounded by a red glow emanating from himself. The night was completely cloudless."

A government official in Washington, whom I am not naming for obvious reasons, recently told me about an experience he had while living in Long Island in 1957. According to him, he was awakened by the barking and squealing of his dog and , leaving the house, he saw a huge delta-wing plane majestically floating above him in complete silence. The plane was surrounded by some kind of eerie crimson glow. Since he had never seen anything like this, he called the nearest air base and reported what had happened.

The next day he was called to the air base, where the officer in charge of security for the area asked him to provide some additional details, saying that they had received similar reports from other people. (Apart from a small number of prototypes, delta wing aircraft were a rarity in the fifties.) UFO enthusiasts and the organizations they create are primarily concerned with collecting information about unusually shaped objects such as discs and flying saucers. However, the Organization for the Study of Aerial Phenomena, having received an intriguing message about a mysterious aircraft, investigated it with all possible care. The witness voluntarily agreed to testify on a lie detector test and answer questions from professional psychologists. The witness's name is Wilhelm Hetzke, a rancher in Calgary (Alberta, Canada). It completely passed the detector test. An entire chapter of Jim and Karel Lorentz’s book “UFOs over America” is devoted to this incident.

One morning in October 1965, Wilhelm Hetzke was riding horseback through the grounds of the Sickle Jay Ranch when he suddenly saw what looked like a small airplane sitting on the ground. It was silver-gray in color with backward (delta-shaped) wings. Approaching closer, Hetske carefully examined the plane. It was about 16 feet long, with a wingspan of 12 feet, and the thickness of the fuselage did not exceed 4-5 feet.

According to Hetzke, the plane's skin was unusual, resembling a "wafer surface." A transparent, apparently plastic, canopy covered the cabin. Through it one could see all sorts of complex instruments, a fourteen-inch television screen and two small, glass-like, sunken seats. There were no engines, propellers, nozzles visible, as well as no identification marks or even numbers. There were no signs of life either in the plane or around it. Hetzke, who was in a hurry to get to work, was forced to leave and was unable to return to this place later.

Hetzke's description of the aircraft contained many more details than we have given here, most of them very unusual.

Although the object had very ordinary wings and a tail fin, its interior and waffle-like skin speak for themselves. (Numerous reports indicate that UFOs have rough or grooved skin. Obviously, this kind of lumpy surface is necessary for sudden braking and reducing the potential speed of the object. Newest aircraft made with such a smooth surface as technologically possible.

Even an incorrectly fitted rivet head can significantly reduce speed.) The aircraft discovered by Hetzke was clearly built for very small pilots and flew according to a principle unknown to us, which did not require either propellers or jet flow. (It should also be noted that all gliders have very long wings, while the object Heitzke discovered had very short ones.) If you saw such a plane slowly flying overhead, you probably wouldn't pay much attention to it.


Mysterious cargo planes

Several more types of mysterious aircraft are operating over the territory North America. A giant machine, reminiscent of the Flying Boxcar military transport aircraft, often appeared over flap areas, performing maneuvers that were completely impossible for vehicles of this class. A group of witnesses from a suburb of Gallipolis, Ohio, told me that they had been observing mysterious flying lights over their hills and fields for thirty years. In addition, without any leading questions on my part, they began to talk about “big cargo planes”, which fly over the hills a couple of times a month, and “sometimes so low that they’re about to crash into some hill.” These cargo planes are multi-engine and painted a dull gray color. There are no regular military or civil aviation routes over Gallipolis. Air Force Bases there is none nearby, and planes heading to the airport in Charleston, West Virginia, pass much further north. And this is understandable, since the reckless courage required when flying over the treacherous range of mountains in the Ohio-West Virginia region is in no way justified.

In his report to the Armed Forces Committee on the Investigation of the UFO Phenomenon (April 5, 1966), engineer Raymond Fowler focused on the results of his own investigation conducted in the Exeter (New Hampshire) area. In particular, he said: “On my first two visits to Carl Dinning Field (where UFO sightings had previously been reported), on both occasions I saw a low-flying C-19 Flying Boxcar. This happened on September 11, 1965." In my own research, I have heard from many people in areas far from each other and from Air Force bases describing C-19 aircraft.

All witnesses saw these planes flying at very low altitude, which in itself is strange for this class of aircraft, not to mention the fact that the aerobatics that these aircraft demonstrated were simply impossible for them. For a while I assumed that Air Force specially equipped aircraft were sent to the flap areas for photography and various tests. But the facts forced me to part with this pleasant hypothesis, replacing it with a very unpleasant one. I came to the conclusion that aircraft resembling the C-19 actually operated in flap areas, but, alas, they had absolutely nothing to do with our Air Force.

Small single engine aircraft have also been frequently spotted flying and sniffing around the sites of recent UFO sightings. As usual, these planes were painted gray and had no markings.

Knowledgeable witnesses, some of whom had binoculars, saw them over Texas, Florida and West Virginia. Like large cargo planes, these little machines fly at night with brightly lit cabins, and are seen in the air on those stormy and stormy nights when no sane pilot would dare take to the air. There are many facts confirming the love of UFOs for bad weather.

In March 1968, in Point Pleasant, West Virginia, competent observers watched for low-lying lights over Highway 62 during an overnight snowstorm. The lights were of a characteristic UFO type. Directly behind these lights was a small single-seat airplane, seemingly oblivious to the wind and snowstorm.

A year before this incident, in early April 1967, I had been chasing a strange flying fire from an area of ​​old World War II explosives depots north of Point Pleasant to the start of a mountain range outside Henderson, West Virginia. I stopped the pursuit and, getting out of the car, joined a group of people standing on the top of one of the hills, when a twin-engine plane suddenly appeared, circled, and flew straight at us, barely missing the tops of the trees. As we got closer, the plane turned off its engines, gliding literally over our heads - a completely idiotic maneuver, considering the treacherous updrafts that always surround the hills and gorges. The cabin of the plane was brightly lit, and the figure of the pilot was clearly visible in it. It was about 9 pm, very dark, and the brightly lit cabin looked doubly strange. What kind of pilot is this who not only decided to fly over the treetops in exceptionally dangerous area, but also deliberately stopped the engines and blinded himself by turning on the bright lights in the cockpit?

I jumped into the car and, crossing the Ohio River, rushed to a small airfield near Gallipolis to look at this crazy pilot, since, according to my calculations, he had nowhere else to land. There was no one at the airfield; the cars parked there were covered, and the engines of none of them were warmed up. Of course, there are probably owners of private jets who like to pinch their nerves with night flights at low altitudes, but it is unlikely that among them there will be those who would risk both their license and their lives by performing such stupid and dangerous stunts over densely populated areas.

Swedish researcher Ek Frensen, recently immersed in the Stockholm newspapers of the thirties, has pieced together many forgotten fragments of the Scandinavian flap of 1932-1938. He dug up over 90 detailed messages and was kind enough to do the boring job of translating them into English language for us. These messages paint a stunning picture.

Since 1932 large planes unmarked aircraft began to appear over northern Sweden, Norway and Finland. All descriptions of these cars indicate that they were gray in color. They often appeared during terrible snowstorms over cities, railway stations, forts and ships at sea. Often, while circling over some object, they turned off their engines. Many of them were described as huge, multi-engine machines. One group of five witnesses reported sightings of a huge eight-engine aircraft. From many reports it is clear that these cars repeatedly appeared in threes.

In those years there were almost no private jets in Scandinavia. The giant China Clipper was still being built in the United States, and the lumbering three-engine Ford, just beginning production, was used on the numerous commercial airlines then in existence. In 1926, Admiral Bide and Floyd Bennett flew from Spitsbergen to the North Pole in a three-engine Fokker.

Their flight was widely covered by the Scandinavian press, and a photograph of the Fokker circulated in all newspapers.

Six years later, when they began to appear over Scandinavia mysterious planes, many witnesses compared them to Bayda's Fokker.

The Swedish government took these reports very seriously. In 1934, no fewer than 24 Swedish Air Force biplanes were sent to patrol remote and sparsely populated areas of the country where "flying ghosts" were reported to be appearing. A thorough search was organized on land, sea and in the air. The operation was carried out in unfavorable weather conditions, which resulted in the loss of two Swedish aircraft.

I will try to summarize here some of the main cases of this flop.

The sources are the following newspapers: DABENS NEWHETER, STOCKHOLMOTIDNINGEN, VASTERBOTTENSKU RIREN, NORRBOTTENS ALLEMANDA, HUDIKSVALS TIDNINGEN and THE NEW YORK TIMES.

“Piteo.” The parish priest from Landtresk reported that over the past two years he had often seen some mysterious planes in this area. Last summer, “flying ghosts” flew over their town twelve times, always following the same route and direction - from the south -west to northeast.

Four times the planes appeared at a very low altitude, but no identification marks were visible on them.

In one case, the plane's altitude was only a few meters above the dome of the parish church. For a few seconds, the two pilots in the cockpit were clearly visible. The car was a gray monoplane.

The priest did not report this earlier because he thought that the authorities already knew about it from other sources."

Before December 1933, very few reports were published, but the experience of the 1909 flop over New England gives every reason to believe that there were already enough reported sightings before they made their way to the press.

The first note in our possession describes a UFO sighting on Christmas Eve: “December 24, 1933 Calix. The mysterious plane appeared from the sea at about 6 p.m. Passed over Kalix and disappeared in a western direction. A beam of light from a searchlight directed from an airplane illuminated the area.” On December 27, 1933, THE NEW YORK TIMES devoted nearly an entire column to the appearance of a “mysterious airplane during a violent snowstorm” just above New York City. At 9:30 a.m. on December 26, people throughout Manhattan clearly heard the sound of an airplane, apparently circling the city in the blinding shroud of a snowstorm. Radio station NBS noted the incident in latest news, telephone calls with messages rained down on newspaper editorial offices. THE TIMES continues:

“A comparison of various reports indicates that the pilot flew to 72nd Street, circled Central Park and then headed for the Bronx area (231st Street and Sedwick Avenue). There were no further reports for some time, but at about 2:25 p.m., the sound of an engine was reported from the area of ​​155th Street, near the causeway across the Hudson... All airfields in the Metropolitan area reported that there were no flights and no aircraft landing at them all day , making our way through the snowstorm."

The planes of 1933 were simply unable to fly in such difficult weather conditions, and it is very doubtful that even now any plane could remain in the air for five or six hours during a snowstorm. But the plane that appeared over Manhattan did just that, and, of course, no one ever found out anything about the plane.

In February 1934, exactly the same incident occurred over the capital of Great Britain (see NEW YORK TIMES, February 4, 1934).

In Scandinavia, “flying ghosts” immediately after Christmas began to be extremely active. (Remember that the 1909 flop also happened during Christmas week.) There was a report of an unknown aircraft flying back and forth along the Swedish-Norwegian border, and the report came from two places - from Ternaby (Sweden) and from Langmo Vefon (Norway) . On December 28, 1935, the 4th Air Corps of the Swedish Air Force was ordered to fly to Ternaby to investigate the incident.

The mystery took on a tragic twist when Lieutenant Georg Engelhard of an artillery regiment in Gotland set out on skis from Tennas to Storlien, a route that led through forested areas where the flying ghosts were reported to be most common. The lieutenant did not arrive at Storlien. Search parties, including Norwegian Air Force aircraft, tried in vain to locate him. On January 4, 1934, a group of three skiers followed Engelhard's supposed path and did not return. A new search group was organized to find them.

Even the NEW YORK TIMES became interested in this escalating mystery. On January 10, 1934, the Times correspondent from Stockholm reported:

“The Swedish Air Force has already lost two aircraft in its persistent efforts to locate the bases of the mysterious aircraft. Everyone's attention is now focused on the fate of Lieutenant Engelhard-Wanberg, who went missing on Christmas Eve, and the three skiers who disappeared while trying to find the lieutenant. A spokesman for the Ministry of Defense told reporters that the search for all four missing soldiers has not yet yielded any results.”

Three missing skiers suddenly appeared on January 12 at the New Style railway station. The newspapers gave no explanation for their long absence. If they gave an interview to anyone, it has not yet been possible to find its publication.

Finally, on January 17, Lieutenant Engelhard’s tent was discovered, and two miles from it, the frozen body of the officer himself. Despite the storm raging in the area, the lieutenant left his skis and fur jacket in the tent and set off on foot into the mountains to meet his death. No further details about this case have been released.

What made the most experienced skier and hunter leave his skis and warm clothes in the tent and hike into the mountains through a furious snowstorm? We will probably never know.

While the unfortunate Engelhard was being searched for in the mountains of northern Norway, the flying ghosts continued their flights over the three Scandinavian countries. About a third of all published messages for January-February 1934 occurred on Sundays. Swedish officials openly referred to these cases as “Sunday cases.” Several reports of landings of mysterious machines came from areas remote from each other. They all happened on Wednesday.

The prints found in the snow at the landing sites were traces of airplane skis.

That year there were many mass sightings of cities and towns with mysterious cars flying over them. Planes often flew during snowstorms, sometimes circling low over villages, illuminating the ground with powerful searchlights.

We will take the liberty of citing a few facts about these incidents, gleaned from the above-mentioned newspapers;

1. Sunday, December 31, 1933 - Olaf Hellund - "a serious man of good reputation" - saw "a large gray plane that was larger than any military aircraft he knew." The plane made three circles over the Sorsel railway station at 3.45 am. The car was a monoplane and completely enclosed, which resembled a passenger plane. It was equipped with floats or skis of some special design... No identification marks were visible. (It was a full moon, the night was clear.) During the flight over the station, the aircraft engine did not work.

2. Wednesday, January 10, 1934 - At 6 o'clock in the evening, residents of the city of Tarn noticed a sparkling object at an altitude of 1000 feet. The object turned and headed towards Arjeplog. 15 minutes later, residents of Arjeplog, hearing the noise of an aircraft engine, poured out of their houses to look at the plane. The plane then appeared over Rortrask, north of Norse, and witnesses claim that the plane's engine stopped three times as it flew over their town... The car flew so low that the entire forest was flooded with light."

3. Wednesday, January 10, 1934 Trondheim, Norway. - “Two landings of flying ghosts were reported in northern Norway on Wednesday evening. One car landed near the island of Gjeslingen on the parallel of Rorvik, the other in the Namndala area, in a place called Kvala. A report from Gjeslingen said that residents saw a huge beam of light and heard the noise of a powerful engine. The car landed and remained on the water for about an hour and a half, illuminating the sea around it with a searchlight.”

The Norwegian cruiser Eagle was sent to the island, but it arrived too late.

4. Sunday, January 21, 1934 - “On Sunday, at 6 o'clock in the evening, many residents of Bengtoforsen (Scotland) saw a very bright light in the sky.

It was about the size of the moon at full moon and moved at great speed. The sound of a running engine could be clearly heard... In Indal, west of Bengtoforsen, the light appeared at the beginning of seven. Many people watched as the fire circled over the village for ten minutes and then disappeared in a westerly direction."

Much to the displeasure of the Swedish military authorities, these mysterious machines liked to circle over railway stations and forts, especially Fort Boden, not neglecting other important strategic sites. Many observed only a blinding beam from the light, and our old friend “spotlight” began to appear in one message or another.

When a large gray plane began to circle the Norwegian ship Tordenkskiold off the coast of Tromsø on Tuesday, January 23, 1934, it was flying at low altitude, scanning the deck with a powerful searchlight. Captain Sigvard Olsen said the pilot was clearly visible in the brightly lit cockpit. He was wearing a helmet with large flying glasses.

But the real flop began on Saturday, January 6, when a significant number of sightings were recorded simultaneously throughout Sweden. Then the flop peaks were: Monday January 8th, Wednesday January 10th, Saturday January 20th, Sunday January 21st, Tuesday January 23rd, Thursday January 25th, Tuesday February 6th and Sunday February 11th.

The number of published reports dropped sharply when army and counterintelligence representatives were sent to the areas of the most frequent sightings for a thorough investigation. The military ministries of Sweden, Norway and Finland already had their own, and very gloomy, point of view on this whole matter.

The territorial airspace of their countries was violated in the most flagrant manner, and not by one or two aircraft, but by an entire air armada operating with suspicious persistence. These aircraft were larger in size than any combat vehicle and could operate in any weather over any, even the most dangerous, mountainous territory. Such a global operation necessarily required the presence of well-equipped bases with a large number of technical personnel, with a well-thought-out system for supplying fuel and other necessary equipment, such as warehouses with spare parts, food, a repair base, etc. But despite careful searches undertaken by the armed forces of three states, nothing resembling such a base, of course, was found.

Aircraft carriers in 1934 were still in their infancy and could produce and accept only a small number of small biplanes.

In 1942, the US Navy slightly modernized the Hornet aircraft carrier in order to deliver General Doolittle's twin-engine B-25 bombers closer to the shores of Japan (The author is mistaken: in 1942, James Doolittle, who commanded the famous flight over Tokyo, was not a general, but a lieutenant colonel. - approx.

With great difficulty, these bombers took off from the aircraft carrier and carried out a purely symbolic raid on Tokyo, but they could no longer land on the aircraft carrier and were forced to fly to the unoccupied part of mainland China.

In 1934, Hitler was still gaining strength, and the Luftwaffe simply did not exist yet.

The Soviet Union had no aircraft and, more importantly, no reason for such senseless moves over Scandinavia. After all, there was a huge risk of causing an unprecedented international scandal. If even one of these planes had crashed or been captured and it had been proven that it belonged to some foreign power, then the actions of the entire armada could not be regarded other than the beginning of hostilities.

Based on some information known, probably only to the editors of the NEW YORK TIMES, this newspaper suggested that the Japanese were to blame for the entire Scandinavian history. But not a single Scandinavian newspaper, despite the large number of speculations discussed, even hinted at blaming Japan. And the justice of this is absolutely obvious - Japan, which was resolving its problems in China at that time, had neither the capabilities nor the reasons to carry out such an operation.

At the very beginning of the flap, Swedish newspapers consoled themselves with a completely frivolous conclusion about alcohol smugglers delivering alcohol to the Scandinavian countries. It makes no sense to refute it; we only note that even the official investigation left no stone unturned...

As during the flaps of 1896-1897 and 1909, during the flap of 1934 there were random flights at low altitudes of objects, in principle familiar to people, and hundreds of high-altitude flights of mysterious lights that seemed to be they were controlled, judging by the maneuvers they performed. The mysterious planes were "solid" objects and were used to support much more more“soft” objects, which for some reason deployed their operations in northern latitudes. Witnesses reported seeing planes displaying red, green and white lights. When these sparkling lights were seen at high altitudes, it was assumed that the planes were flying to connect with flying ghosts hiding somewhere much higher.

The mysterious planes could perform amazing maneuvers. They turned off their engines, sometimes at an altitude of no more than 100 feet, and without any visible energy they made three or four circles over some object.

Try to perform such a maneuver on a regular plane, and you will end up in its wreckage. On April 30, 1934, Major General Reutersvard, commander of the district in Norland (Sweden), issued the following statement to the press:

“A comparison of all the reports leaves no shadow of doubt about the illegal inspection from the air of our secret strategic areas. Many reports received from completely reliable people give an almost detailed description of these mysterious machines, and in each case one common detail attracts attention: neither no identifying marks were seen on one of these cars... It is absolutely impossible to explain all these cases by fantasy or hallucination. And then the questions arise: “who are they?”, “and why are they violating our airspace?”

If all the flying ghost courses of 1934 are plotted on a map, then their route seems to become clear. It seems that day after day they flew in a huge arc with fanatical constancy. Flying south from northern Norway, they passed over Sweden and turned north again over Finland. If we make a complete circle out of this arc, then its upper part will be in the area of ​​the sparsely populated island of Spitsbergen in the Arctic Ocean, and the western part will be on the northern tip of the island of Greenland. By the way, a lot of interesting observations took place over Greenland. (In Chapter 1 we talked about a case where a whole array of unidentified objects was detected by radar while flying over Greenland.) Hundreds of reports of UFO sightings come from the Arctic regions and thus seem to confirm the theory, very popular, that flying saucers appear from holes above North Pole. The Aerial Phenomena Research Organization has a groundbreaking theory that objects enter Earth's polar regions from space to avoid an intense radioactive belt concentrated over temperate zones.


Radio signals from eternity

During the flying ghosts' flights over Scandinavia, mysterious radio signals were received throughout Sweden and Norway. This issue was also widely discussed in the press. On January 11, 1934, one of the newspapers in the city of Umeå (Sweden) noted the following:

“Officers at the Air Force headquarters believe that the mysterious aircraft have radio transmitters and radio navigation devices on board... It is certain that these aircraft are representatives of some extraordinary organization.”

“Radio listeners in the city of Umeå intercepted conversations of flying ghosts on their receivers, from which it can be concluded that their intelligence service is at the highest level... The radio conversations took place in the wake of a popular music program in the city of Umeå, and their topic was a discussion of the rendezvous of several flying ghosts. At the end of the negotiations, the time for the next contact was announced.” (Correspondents investigating a claim of UFO contact in 1956-1957 by a certain Howard Menger from New Jersey allegedly discovered a strange radio transmitter on the territory of his farm. This transmitter did not emit its own signals, but used signals “stolen” from a local radio station. Swedish reports suggest that someone in Umeå in 1934 was using the same equipment, when the "output" of a regular radio station was used as a source of energy for "pirate" signals.) On January 25, 1934, a worker in Nyrbyskara (Sweden) named Galmar Hedstrom received the following message on his receiver, transmitted on short waves: “The sea is calm, the temperature is two degrees Celsius. You have to get on the water and catch what we were talking about. Be in touch again at 19.45.” The message also contained data on wind direction, location coordinates and other information. Although all negotiations were conducted in Swedish, Hedstrom could not remember much.

Another radio amateur from the city of Hedesund picked up a similar message on the same day. An additional message was also intercepted at the specified time - 19.45.

Some messages were received at a wave of 900 m, others in the range of 230-275 m.

The vast majority of sightings in 1934, regardless of location, occurred around 6 p.m. In March, the flap began to wane, but periodic reports were received throughout the thirties.

"Reports are coming from various places about mysterious lights being seen in the sky. A correspondent for the Norwegian Telegraphic Agency collected some of these reports during a trip to the Sixth District. Almost all sightings were reported by residents to the police, whose representative gave a detailed information to the correspondent. A sighting was also reported mysterious lights around Tromso on Tuesday evening.

Flying ghosts returned to Scandinavia in 1936, exactly repeating the beaten paths of 1934. Once again, their appearance was accompanied by mysterious radio signals. The NEW YORK TIMES correspondent, who in 1934 tried to blame Japan for everything that happened, this time accused Germany of transmitting mysterious radio signals. But again, as in 1934, the Scandinavian press did not attach any significance to these fabrications.

When a brightly sparkling object was chased across the midwestern prairie by. train in 1937, the NEW YORK TIMES in its August 15 issue, citing astronomers, attributed the incident to the influence of the planet Venus.

It is hardly necessary to point out that the inhabitants of northern Scandinavia are very familiar with northern lights and other ordinary astronomical and atmospheric phenomena. It is doubtful that they paid much attention to anything that they thought could have a natural explanation.

We have at our disposal two messages from different parts of Europe that deserve to be cited in this book. On Thursday, February 11, 1937, the Norwegian fishing trawler "Fram" left Kvalovik at about 9 o'clock in the evening. While rounding the mountainous cape separating Kvalovik harbor from the ocean, the trawler's crew noticed a large seaplane sitting on the water.

Deciding that the plane had crashed, the captain of the trawler changed course and headed towards it. The green and red warning lights on the wings of the vehicle were clearly visible, but as the ship began to approach, the lights suddenly went out. At the same moment, the plane was enveloped in clouds of smoke and disappeared.

At noon the next day, Friday February 12, 1937, an unknown plane appeared over the capital of Austria, Vienna, and began circling over the city. The unusual nature of this case was widely noted in the European press. Obviously, there were some reasons to doubt the origin of this aircraft.


Scandinavia: 1946

On June 10, 1946, an object resembling a German V-2 rocket passed over Finland. Over the next two weeks, UFO-like lights, cylindrical objects and unidentified winged vehicles were seen by thousands of people in Sweden and Norway. The vast majority of sightings were concentrated in cold, sparsely populated northern regions both countries. The European press gave them due attention - the “ghost rockets” replaced the flying ghosts of 1934. They were seen far to the south, over Greece and over the mountains of Switzerland, where they confidently flew over gorges and canyons. They were intercepted by radar and photographed. (One such photograph, showing an arrow-shaped streak of light, was published by the London MORNING POST on September 6, 1946.) The speed of these objects was measured to be between 400 and 1000 miles per hour.

Some of the objects seemed to explode in the air, some threw out shards of metal that looked like ordinary slag.

English and Scandinavian newspapers openly accused the Soviet Union of what it was doing in the airspace northern Europe testing new types of combat missiles. Moscow categorically denied this fact. In September, bright green orbs were spotted over Portugal. A “huge shell with a fiery tail” swept over Casablanca. A huge flaming sphere whistled through the sky over Oslo and exploded with a terrifying roar. On Wednesday, July 3, 1946, a mysterious explosion rocked a small town in central Scotland, shattering glass in the windows and killing one person (apparently from shell shock). No one could explain the cause of this explosion. Swedish authorities have collected more than 2,000 reports of “ghost missiles.” Although this flop was very sparingly covered by the American press, General James Doolittle flew to Stockholm to participate in the investigation. London was also shaken by a series of explosions, the origin of which no one could explain.

At the end of August 1946 the lid slammed shut. On August 22, the London newspaper DAILY TELEGRAPH reported: “To prevent the leakage of technical information about the launch of missiles flying over Denmark, the Danish government asked correspondents not to indicate those areas of the country where these missiles were seen...”. On August 31, 1946, the DAILY TELEGRAPH correspondent in Oslo reported:

“Starting Wednesday, Norwegian newspapers stopped any discussion about missile flights over Scandinavia. Today, the Norwegian General Staff issued a memorandum for the press, demanding that no information about the appearance of missiles over Norwegian territory be published in the press and that all reports on this topic be directed to the General Staff Intelligence Directorate ...

In Sweden it is also prohibited to mention in the press about flights and explosions of missiles over the country's territory."

In a short 50 years, we've gone from mysterious inventions to espionage and smuggling, and then to Russian secret weapons. Since none of these explanations can be taken seriously, and the phenomenon continues to be observed, we seem to be left with the only acceptable hypothesis: the arrival of aliens on Earth from outer space. For a long time now, members of the Fortian Society, admirers and followers of the late Charles Fort, have been fueling this hypothesis with their irresponsible publications. They haven't yet been asked a question, but they already have an answer ready for anything. Their thought works in this direction: in 1945 we dropped atomic bombs to Japan. The energy of atomic explosions was recorded in space by instruments of some alien supercivilization.

This super-civilization was terribly shocked by the fact that such a nonentity as man had discovered the secret of atomic energy. To investigate this sad fact, an expedition to Earth was organized. However, a certain superintelligent navigator made a small mistake and, instead of leading the spaceship to the damaged Japan, flew to Scandinavia.

It's a shame if that's the case.


Mysterious helicopters

Thousands of observations for the period 1896-1938. ghostly airships and mysterious planes lead us to the next inevitable conclusion; the true substance of a phenomenon is such that it can give itself any desired form according to own choice. And this raises a very important question: do these things really exist? Or are all the thousands of messages nothing more than examples of mass hysteria, correspondent jokes and incorrect interpretation of natural phenomena?

It is impossible to have two points of view. Either we must recognize the overwhelming percentage of messages as true, or they are all pure nonsense.

If I were writing a book about, say, the Civil War, I would use the same sources, i.e., old newspapers, historical documents, letters from participants in the events, and as a result, the book I created would be accepted by scholars and historians with little or no no questions at all. But flying saucers have been so discredited by all sorts of amateur theories and fans of the alien version that skeptics, who easily find obvious nonsense in all their hypotheses, have reason to claim the same about all other data about UFOs.

If a farmer in the sixties of the last century, who participated in the battles of the Civil War, left behind a stack of crumpled letters where he describes the events he experienced, then historians like tigers rush to these letters in order to repeatedly quote them in their scientific works. But if the same farmer saw some unusual object over California in 1875 and reported it in a letter to the local newspaper, then why can’t this letter be considered a historical document today? No, skeptics will find fault with every word of such a letter, and if there is nothing to find fault with, they will question the sanity of the author.

My strong opinion is that we should stop asking the question: “can such things really happen?”, and start asking another: “what could this all mean?”

The gullible may get caught up in stories about amazing spaceships from distant galaxies, and everything will become clear to them. But what will they say about the numerous stories associated with seemingly completely ordinary planes and helicopters? Yes, there are also ghost helicopters!

On Tuesday, October 11, 1968, a bright flying fire danced over drinking water reservoirs in New Jersey. There had been enough strange sightings in that area before, but this case was doubly strange. A few minutes after the blinding bright object disappeared, a whole formation of mysterious helicopters appeared.

“This thing blinded me so much that I could not find my car,” one of the witnesses to the incident, police sergeant Ben Thompson, told Dr. Berthold Schwartz. “It was as if I was looking straight into a spotlight to see the sockets of reflective lamps... After that, I saw absolutely nothing for about twenty minutes.”

About 15 minutes after the blinding object disappeared, a squad of helicopters appeared and began circling at low altitude. A group of ten or twelve jets appeared a little above them. Hundreds of cars filled with stunned spectators drove up to this place. They, of course, saw helicopters, but not in such numbers. Police Sergeant Robert Gordon described his confusion this way: “I’ve never seen seven helicopters in the air at once in my entire life... And I’ve lived here for forty years.”

Science journalist Lloyd Mellen investigated this case. He made inquiries at all nearby Air Force bases, airports and even the Pentagon. Nobody knew anything about these helicopters and planes. The Civil Aviation Bureau was as amazed as anyone else. No one was able to lift the veil of secrecy. I don’t really believe that this was the Air Force’s reaction to the appearance of a sparkling object above the tanks. Firstly, because no one reported this directly to the Air Force, and secondly, because at the nearby McCuire and Stewart airbases there never was such a large detachment of helicopters, and if there were, then, given their slowness, it is unlikely that within 15 minutes they would have appeared over the scene of the incident. Of course, we must not forget that the existing opinion about the shameless lies of representatives of the Air Force about everything related to UFOs may not be without foundation.

Residents of New Jersey claim to have seen these helicopters and jets. So they're all lying? But what's the point of such a lie? And if this is true, then where, where and why did these cars fly? And who controlled them?

The North Vietnamese have a miniscule number of aircraft and even fewer helicopters. However, at the end of June 1968, a whole formation of strange lights appeared over the Ben Hai River, and one of the mysterious helicopters was reported to have even been shot down. NEWSWICK Vietnam correspondent Robert Stocke was at the scene. Here is his message (NEWSWICK July 1, 1968):

"Captain William Bates was on duty at the radio transmitter at regimental headquarters in the village of Dong Ha. At 2300, the Marine forward patrol radioed that their observer had detected thirteen yellow-white lights through an electronic telescope, floating in a westerly direction at an altitude of 500 to 1000 feet above the Ben Hai River, which flows in the middle of the demilitarized zone, Bates immediately contacted the command to find out whether there were any aircraft or helicopters in the observation area. Having received a negative response, the captain contacted the Alpha 2 anti-aircraft radar station, the northernmost military unit 1. building. Less than a minute later, a response came from the station about strange glare at all 360 degrees of all-round visibility.

Around 1 a.m., Air Force and Marine aircraft were already over Da Nang and began pursuing unidentified objects. 45 minutes later, a Marine pilot reported that the helicopter had been destroyed. However, when a reconnaissance aircraft equipped with infrared equipment flew over the area, it did not detect burning debris anywhere."

In June, these objects were intercepted almost every night by radar over the demilitarized zone. And it was never possible to identify them, and there is hardly any reason to consider them really Vietnamese planes or helicopters. If this were the case, it would be surprising why Northern Vietnam suddenly stopped using them because they no longer appeared after June 1968.

A few weeks after this series of incidents, mysterious helicopters appeared over Maryland. At about 8:20 p.m. on Tuesday, August 19, 1968, an oval object surrounded by red and white sparkling lights hung over the Rosecroft Retreat near Phelps Constance, Maryland. One of the many witnesses, Geese E. Donovan, stated that she also saw at least seven helicopters circling the object. “I noticed it,” she said, “because I’ve never seen so many helicopters in the air.”

Maybe our Air Force is secretly hunting for flying saucers in helicopters, having found nothing better? We, of course, often, albeit unsuccessfully, use fighters to chase unidentified objects, but neither I nor many Air Force officers with whom I spoke had ever heard of the use of helicopters for this purpose, even by rumor.

Helicopters are very expensive cars and difficult to manage. It is for these reasons that the prediction from the Second World War that “helicopters will be in every garage” did not come true. UFO hunting operations require multiple helicopters to be kept in a constant state of readiness for immediate departure. I snooped around many of our air bases and did not find even a hint of such operations.

I have come to the conclusion that the unidentified helicopters are in the same category as the flying ghosts of 1934 and the tiny airplane in Calgary.

They are part of the entire UFO phenomenon, and not at all proof of our hunt for unidentified objects.


Do flying saucers really exist?

Since 1982, thousands of UFO photographs have been taken. Many of them recorded vague spots and streaks of light, but many were clearly “solid” objects, similar to cars of some kind with windows, hatches and other clearly visible parts. And here another problem arises. With very few exceptions, no two UFO images are alike. I have received hundreds of photographs in the mail and collected hundreds of others during my travels. Since photographs are so easily forged, I have generally avoided taking much care either of the photographs themselves or of their authors. However, I myself took two very similar photographs in two different areas.

Over the past three years, I have interviewed thousands of eyewitnesses in person, by telephone, and by mail. At the same time, many of those who gave descriptions of sparkling, changing “soft” objects said the same thing. But I have rarely heard two independent witnesses describe in one word the “solid” object they saw. I have heard of tiny saw-saw-like objects circling the mines in Ohio, and of giant gondola-shaped machines with many rows of windows hovering over the Kaitatini Mountains of northern New Jersey. And it seems there were as many different forms of objects as there were witnesses. However, I am reassured over and over again that the witnesses were reliable and were simply being honest about what they saw.

And if we assume that the witnesses are telling the truth, then we can safely assume that UFOs appear in billions of different sizes and shapes. Or they have no shape at all. And this brings us back to the old psychological warfare gambit. If there are continuous contradictions in the description of objects, then few will take this phenomenon seriously, but if people, say, in Brazil, Iowa and Australia begin to give the same testimony, then this may immediately alert both scientists and the military.

PROJECT BLUE BOOK REPORT 14 attempted to address this problem. Air Force specialists put 434 reports of unidentified objects into a computer, trying to obtain a basic model. They received 12 main types of objects. Of the thousands of reports that are available, you can get 1200 or 1,200,000 with equal success various types UFO. And those 12 types of objects that are described in REPORT 14 were no longer observed at all after 1955.


Then maybe there are no types of UFOs at all?

Our catalog of UFO types currently contains flying cubes, triangles, hexagons, cones, spheres, objects resembling giant metal insects and flying jellyfish. We have UFOs with wheels, wings, antennas, with convex domes, flat windows and without them at all. We have objects of all colors of the spectrum. There are giant “cigars” with many portholes that spew blue fire from their tail. (“A base that produces flying saucers,” as supporters of the alien version assure us.) We have wheelless cars driving around deserted places several inches above the ground. We also have unmarked piston and jet planes and unidentified helicopters roaming the flap areas. In other words, we have everything except a basic pattern that would appear regularly in different years and in different places. And all this forces us to make two inevitable conclusions to choose from:

1. All witnesses are either mistaken or lying.

2. Some unknown super-civilization produces thousands of different types of flying cars and sends them to our planet.

Governments of all countries of the world stubbornly adhere to the first conclusion, UFO enthusiasts - to the second.

As for me, I adhere to neither one nor the other. Moreover, I suggest a third alternative. I believe that some "solid" objects definitely only exist as temporary transmog. They are disco and cigar shaped. They leave distinct marks on the ground after planting.

Witnesses touched them and even went inside. These “solid” objects are nothing more than bait, just like the airships and planes of yesterday, the purpose of which is to cover and ensure actions huge amount"soft" objects. Therefore, my main interest is in “soft” objects.

They are the key to solving the whole mystery.

There are countless reports of objects changing size and shape right before the eyes of witnesses, or splitting into several small objects, each of which flew off in a different direction. In some cases, the reverse process occurred: several small objects merged into one large one, which then calmly continued its flight.

Many times witnesses have said to me, in a mysterious lowering of their voice: “You know, I believe that those things that I saw were not cars. I got the strong impression that they were alive.”

Researchers such as John Bessor and Ivan T. Sanderson have openly discussed the possibility that some UFOs are indeed living creatures. Of course, there is no direct evidence; this statement can be disputed, like any other. Make your own choice. Each point of view has its own strengths, but after analyzing all the data, none of them can be taken into account without very legitimate doubts.

An amazing sight is a cone of steam appearing around an airplane flying at transonic speed. This amazing effect, known as the Prandtl-Gloert effect, causes the eyes to open wide and the jaw to drop. But what is its essence?

(Total 12 photos)

1. Contrary to popular belief, this effect does not appear when the plane breaks the sound barrier. The Prandtl-Gloert effect is also often associated with supersonic bang, which is also not true. Ultra-high bypass aircraft engines can create this effect at takeoff speed because the engine inlet is low pressure and the fan blades themselves operate at transonic speed.

2. The reason for its occurrence is that an airplane flying at high speed creates an area of ​​​​high air pressure in front of it and an area of ​​​​low pressure behind it. After the plane passes, the area of ​​low pressure begins to fill with ambient air. In this case, due to the sufficiently high inertia of air masses, first the entire low pressure area is filled with air from nearby areas adjacent to the low pressure area.

3. Imagine an object moving at transonic speed. Transonic speed is different from the speed of sound. The sound barrier is broken at a speed of 1235 km/h. Transonic speed is below, above or near the speed of sound and can vary from 965 to 1448 km/h. Therefore, this effect can occur when the aircraft is moving at a speed less than or equal to the speed of sound.

4. And yet it’s all about the sound - the “visibility” of this steam cone behind the plane depends on it. The cone shape is created by the force of sound (in the case of airplanes) moving faster than the sound waves it produces. The Prandtl-Gloert effect arises as a result of the wave nature of sounds.

5. Again, think of the plane as the source and the sound as the crest of the wave. These sound wave crests are a series or shell of overlapping circles. When the waves overlap each other, a cone shape is created, and the tip is the source of the sound. So far invisible.

6. For the effect to become visible to the human eye, one more thing is needed - humidity. When the humidity is high enough, the air around the cone condenses and forms the cloud we see. As soon as the air pressure returns to normal, the cloud disappears. The effect almost always occurs on planes flying over the ocean in the summer - the combination of water and heat gives the desired level of humidity.

7. Here you can destroy another one. Some believe that the Prandtl-Gloert effect occurs as a result of fuel combustion.

8. You can probably understand if you think that this effect is a contrail, that is, an unnatural cloud appearing from condensed water vapor produced by engine exhaust. However, this is not the same thing. The water vapor is already there - it's already in the air before the plane even passes through it.

9. Air pressure is also worth mentioning. When an airplane is moving at transonic speed, the air pressure around it is called an N-wave because when pressure varies with time, the result is similar to the letter N.

10. If we could slow down the blast wave passing through us, we would see the leading compression component. This is the beginning of the N. The horizontal stick occurs when the pressure is released, and when normal pressure atmosphere returns to the final point, the letter N is created.

11. The effect is named after two outstanding scientists who discovered this phenomenon. Ludwig Prandtl (1875 – 1953) was a German scientist who studied the development of systematic mathematical analysis in aerodynamics. Hermann Glauert (1892 – 1934) was a British aerodynamicist.

12. Believe it or not, you can create this effect yourself. You only need two things: a whip and a day with high humidity. If you can whip a whip like Indiana Jones, you'll see a similar effect. Although, you shouldn't try this at home.

 

It might be useful to read: