GREAT MAPS!!! Both are needed,
because the Skyhook data are illegible on Joel's overlay. I
assume that's one reason it's taking so long because he is replacing
the altitude/hour/balloon flight captions, etc.
Right off the bat I can see that Flight B on 1-6-48 went slightly W of
S at about a heading of 190 degs, reaching its maximum altitude of
80,000 ft in 3 hours -- thus we can forget about the Skyhook being at
100,000 ft over Kentucky. Its MAXIMUM height was only 80,000
ft. I don't know where the 100,000 ft came from but the actual
tracking shows it is WRONG.
The balloon was also lost at this max altitude point, presumably at
about 11 AM, at about 63 miles out from the actual launch site at
Milaca, Minn., (NOT at Camp Ripley about 43 mi to the NW of Milaca)
thus an average speed of about 21 mph. This max alt point was at
about 35 miles WSW of Minneapolis.
The other winter balloon flights go in almost all directions including
SE. So we must get news clips if any exist reporting it sighted
over S Minn, then showing where it went when it got to Iowa -- IF it
ever even reached Iowa (no way of knowing when it came down). To
get to Kentucky the Skyhook path would have to veer SE or E somewhere.
The Skyhook would have had to be LEAKING and DESCENDING already by 1:45
PM on 1-7-48 when Col Guy Hix at Godman Field saw it stationary,
according to the argument by Ruppelt and C B Moore that if the Skyhook
got into a "turnaround" altitude zone at about 50,000 to 60,000 ft it
could remain almost stationary, which Hix claimed it did for 1-1/2
hours until apparently 3:15 PM about the time Mantell crashed.
Obviously if astronomer Carl Seyfert in Nashville saw the same balloon
and it was a Skyhook, at 4:30-4:45 PM, and if his altitude estimate of
25,000 ft was correct then it must have been DESCENDING at a rate of
about 300 to 500 ft/min and should have landed/crashed at about 5-6 PM
somewhere in Tenn.
Also if Mantell's wingman Clements who landed, refueled and went up
again (with oxygen) to search for Mantell and the UFO on Mantell's
course heading, depending on when he took off (has to be checked) and
how far he went (I recall something to the effect of past the Ky/Tenn
border, needs checking), and he reported going up to 32,000 ft, the
alleged Skyhook balloon should have been down to around 30,000 to
40,000 ft by about 4 PM. Thus Clements should have seen it
STRAIGHT AHEAD of him or somewhere about on his flight level. He
didn't see a thing.
Of course, if I am correct that the Skyhook in this Flight B as
photographed had a gas envelope of only about 50 ft and the rest of the
so-called 100 ft was the cabling for the small instrument packages,
then the Skyhook gas bag could not even have been visible to the human
eye beyond about 30 miles, and no detail of its shape ("ice cream cone"
etc.) could have been discerned unless within about 10 miles from an
observer. In that case Mantell and his wingmen could not even
have seen the Skyhook from 90 miles away over Southern Kentucky and
could not have chased something they could not see for 1/2 hour at
Moreover no ground witness could have seen any shape whatsoever to the
Skyhook when it was at 50,000 to 60,000 ft (10 to 12 miles), it would
have looked like a tiny PINPOINT in the sky, a star, even if at its
closest DIRECTLY OVERHEAD. But witnesses reported it out lower
over the horizon (need to find legible copies to see what they reported
for angular elevation) which would mean 30 miles away if at 20 degs
elevation, and that would be just about beyond visibility.
In a message dated 6/3/2006 4:58:26 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
Subj: Fw: ShyhookMap LowerLeft rescan
Date: 6/3/2006 4:58:26 PM Pacific Daylight Time
File: SkyhookMap_composite_lg2.jpg (3548829 bytes) DL Time
(50667 bps): <19 minutes
Sent from the Internet
This is the composite map from four scans, shows almost everything, but
missing a middle section.
Now you can see the difference between the original and the overlay map
worth the wait I think.
I said to you that it was worth the wait for what Joel was doing. He
fuss and get the resize correct to over lay on the different cities of
If anything was missing people would scream so that's why we were
for Barry to do some rescans for us. Talk about a really good job with
map overlay...too bad we didn't have it all as Joel would be done now.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Joel Carpenter" <email@example.com>
To: "mary" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Sent: Thursday, June 01, 2006 3:28 PM
Subject: Re: ShyhookMap LowerLeft rescan
>Here's a tightened up version -- now all the borders of the drafting
>paper line up. Obviously there are small gaps in the center but I
>don't think it's worth all the trouble of rescanning it to fill
>I will now try to overlay it over a MN map to see how it looks....