Form: Research
Date: Sat, 03 Jun 2006 22:32:30 -0400 (EDT)
From: RB47x@aol.com
Subject: Re: Fw: ShyhookMap Lower Left rescan


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 200-360 mph. 

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, m.castner@comcast.net writes:

Subj: Fw: ShyhookMap LowerLeft rescan
Date: 6/3/2006 4:58:26 PM Pacific Daylight Time
From: m.castner@comcast.net
To: RB47x@aol.com
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 that
Joel did...
worth the wait I think.

I said to you that it was worth the wait for what Joel was doing. He had to
fuss and get the resize correct to over lay on the different cities of the
map.

If anything was missing people would scream so that's why we were waiting
for Barry to do some rescans for us. Talk about a really good job with the
map overlay...too bad we didn't have it all as Joel would be done now.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Joel Carpenter" <crediblesport@gmail.com>
To: "mary" <m.castner@comcast.net>
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 those.
>
>I will now try to overlay it over a MN map to see how it looks....
>
>
>