HOW THE ROSWELL CRASH HAPPENED
(originally published Aug 2010)
Many rightly wonder why an ET vehicle with the ability to traverse light years through the cosmos would arrive all the way to Earth – only to crash in New Mexico. How is it that an interplanetary people with such advanced aerial technology could come to such grief on the July-baked desert floor? Why did the Roswell craft fall in the first place? A review and analysis of the 1947 incident reveals a unique "confluence of events" that may well have led to the crash:
THE STORM ELECTRIC
It is said that Mac Brazel reported hearing a loud explosion during a severe lightning and thunder storm the night before he discovered the crash debris on the Foster Ranch that he managed. RAAF Intel Agent Major Jesse Marcel reported that the scattered debris appeared to him to have "exploded" in mid-air before hitting the ground.
Weather records confirm that there were thunderstorms in late June and early July of 1947 (including on July 2 and July 4) in the Foster Ranch area where some of the crash debris was found. And – as with many areas of the country – in the summertime (particularly in the evenings) such isolated but severe storms can "pop up" without notice in an instant, only to pass as quickly – and often without even being officially recorded.
The action of severe storms on aircraft is still a subject of intense study. Today's aircraft tend to disperse and distribute a lightning strike across and throughout the surface and skin of the craft. Electrical and digital flight systems are also insulated and shielded, helping to prevent a crash. Still, there is no doubt that many hundreds of aircraft do indeed fall from the skies around the world every year due to especially adverse weather conditions. "Freak" weather can "freak out" even the most fortified and hardened technologies.
Interestingly (and perhaps tellingly) it has been recently discovered that certain aircraft – under certain conditions – can themselves promote lightning discharge. In the scientific report "Aviation Weather Surveillance Systems" (P. Mahapatra, RJ Doviak, et al) we learn: "Three major research programs for studying lightning-aircraft interaction focused on lightning strikes in summer thunderstorms. It was learned that the major factor relative to strikes to aircraft is not the amount of natural lightning activity, but the potential presence of an ambient electric field sufficient to initiate a discharge on an aircraft. To trigger a lightning discharge, a conductive aircraft should be in a strong electrical field either inside or outside an electrical cloud."
If the "presence of an ambient electric field" inside or outside the craft is sufficiently strong, lightning attraction and lightning-induced malfunction can occur. ET's craft may have itself generated a "strong electrical field" increasing the chances of lightning strike. And – as will be shown next – there indeed appears to have been yet another "ambient field of energy" at play near Roswell that may have helped contribute to the fall of the ET craft:
SECRET EXPERIMENTAL RADAR
Is it possible that especially powerful, experimental radar beams could have in some way interfered with or "clouded" the navigation and control systems of the ET craft? Could such high-energy transmission and detection systems (which were often placed in a triangulated configuration) have created a malfunction and crash? Was this new modulation unfamiliar to ET – one for which they were unprepared? Did our beaming systems emanate at a frequency or in a path that had adversely penetrated their craft? Or did it somehow displace an energy field that was surrounding the craft? Radar is a pulsed radio signal, a form of electromagnetic radiation. Highly-tuned ET craft may have been sensitive to such radiation.
Little known is that the US Government at that time had maintained an interconnected "beyond the fence" radar network. This secret network served two purposes. It helped to protect White Sands Proving Ground, Sandia National Lab and Los Alamos National Lab from aerial
intrusion. It was also used for the "far-field" tracking of missiles launched from White Sands. Errant V-2's as early as May of 1947 had crashed their way to Mexico. There was no way that wayward rocket launches could ever get into the hands of civilians or foreign nationals. And our national laboratories needed to be protected from any possible foreign strikes from the air. This covert "outside the fence" radar program helped to provide maximum coverage as it monitored these vitally important skies.
Some of these radar facilities were mobile, highly experimental and lacked more exact "control" of beam path and range. Some of their designs did not have the quality to "contain the energy" as more permanent installations did. If such radar beams played a role in the crash, the radar operators likely did not know that the radar had helped to bring down the craft. The radar was not meant to be used as a weapon. It was an unwitting and non-offensive event. Otherwise, military would surely have gotten to the craft before civilians Mack Brazel and Dee Proctor did – and they would not have had to have been alerted by Brazel to the crash.
The radar project involved highly-classified radar installations that were located at remote off-sites. Towers and arrays were sometimes even sited on private property. Area ranchers and locals knew of the existence of these radar installations (usually hidden in wooded or hilly areas) but said nothing out of a sense of patriotic duty and perhaps through financial inducements. This is a little discussed piece of post WWII history – even by military historians.
Such radar systems were found in places like tiny El Vado, NM. One was called "The Continental Divide." There was a radar station located just north of US 60 about 45 miles west of Socorro. Another site was a radar tower on the road to the spread of NM rancher Marvin Ake, 10 miles south of State Rd. 60 between Magdelena and Datil. Yet another was near Oscura Park, some miles just outside of White Sands itself.
Given how we know that UFOs are reported to be able to disrupt our cars, TVs and radios through their emanated frequencies and radiations – isn't it possible that the reverse could be true? Could our technology have (in some as yet unknown way) affected their technology? According to a treatise entitled Electromagnetic Compatibility: "After World War II the military became increasingly concerned with the effects of nuclear electromagnetic pulse (NEMP), lightning strike and even high-powered radar beams on mobile vehicles of all kinds and especially on aircraft electrical systems."
Could a unique and dynamic interplay of lightning, powerful radar beams and the ET craft's own generated energy field have in some way brought it down?
And still other reasons could have come into play, contributing to the crash:
Engineered systems are often highly complex, with much room for malfunction. One can only imagine the intricacy and sophistication of an other-world spacecraft. Internal malfunctions of human spacecraft (either during operations or training for space-flight) have killed 29 astronauts. In fact, five percent of all those who have ever been launched to space have died! Such malfunctions have included exposure to the vacuum of space; structural failure; control failure; separation failure; airlock design fault; tank rupture; and numerous shorts and leaks. Could a component or device onboard or within the ET craft's structure have failed to operate as intended? ET's technology may not always perform its normal, proper and characteristic actions.
All creatures are fallible. No one is perfect. Everyone who has ever walked on this planet has suffered an accident of some sort at some time. So too it must be with those who walk other planets. It is a universal constant. No living thing can always be accurate or correct in their calculations.
Pilot error (or cockpit error) is a cause of an accident where an airworthy aircraft's pilot is considered responsible for the crash. Such an accident can be due to the pilot's disregard for standard operating procedures, a lapse in judgment, an oversight, diverted attention, or a failure to execute due diligence. It is certainly not inconceivable – and is in fact probable – that like Man, ET is subject to such mistakes.
TWO UFOS IN COLLISION OR BATTLE?
Is it possible that more than one ET craft was flying over the skies of New Mexico at the same time that summer? Perhaps there were antagonistic forces at work. If there were competing adversaries from another world who had come to ours, maybe they became aerial assailants. Foes in flight, one was struck to the ground and left to be discovered by Man.
Or perhaps they were not enemies. It is conceivable that they may have collided, just as we experience mid-air collisions. Mid-air collision is generally caused by deviation from flight plans, miscommunication, a navigational error or severe weather conditions. And such collisions are not all that rare. A world-wide FAA analysis shows that in nearly every single year since 1951 notable civilian or military mid-air collisions have occurred, with aggregate fatalities totaling in the thousands.
UFO traffic was heavy at the time in that area. UFO sightings had markedly spiked in New Mexico in the time period of the Roswell crash. And there were in fact indications of another UFO flying above New Mexico that had crashed during that time frame (see my prior article The Other Roswell Crash: The Secret of the Plains Revealed).
Some speculate that early on in the modern UFO era, there were those reactionaries in government and intelligence who viewed such aerial unknowns over our skies as a serious potential military threat. After all, these craft were not authorized to over fly our country and their intentions and origin could not be discerned. They were "illegal" and a national security risk. They were often sighted flying with impunity near military installations, in the path of our jets and close-by our National Labs. Given this justification, some UFOs may have been intentionally shot at by ground-based anti-aircraft fire as well as from our own planes and jets.
Retired Lockheed-Martin "Skunk Works" R&D Senior Scientist Boyd Bushman maintains that he heard many decades ago (through a trusted Naval source) that is indeed exactly what happened – and that an experimental beam weapon had shot down the Roswell craft. His testimony (like similar testimony offered by former NM State Senator Andrew Kissner) is controversial and hearsay, but worthy of consideration as a possible reason why the Roswell craft crashed. Perhaps ET did not believe that we would ever do such a thing – or perhaps they did not think that our firepower or weapons could harm them. Or maybe they were in an unguarded moment and didn't see it coming – and just didn't react quickly enough.
A SAUCER AND MOGUL ENTANGLED?
There is something often forgotten about now-deceased skeptic Karl Pflock. Before he became a skeptic, he was a believer. Pflock had actually maintained that both the Mogul and the ET craft explanations for the crash were likely correct. Skeptic Phil Klass detailed Pflock's then-Roswell-view in his comments on Pflock's 1994 book "Roswell in Perspective." Klass summarized Pflock's theory in his SUN newsletter:
"Pflock speculates that some of the debris found by Brazel might have come from an extraterrestrial craft which had either collided with the Project Mogul balloon or which may have made a violent maneuver in order to avoid a collision, in some way causing both the balloon and the UFO to crash."
Pflock at that time believed that the resulting debris was both terrestrial and extraterrestrial and were together interspersed in the desert. The large balloon array may have somehow enmeshed, entangled or impacted in a way that interrupted the operation of the craft. Or perhaps the craft had to suddenly avert course to prevent such a thing from occurring.
The Mogul – a secret balloon experiment to detect Soviet nuclear explosions – was proffered in the 1990s by the USAF as the explanation for the Roswell
event. The Mogul was a massively long train of balloons and radar reflectors that went far into the atmosphere. Of course UFOs – though they are often mistaken for balloons – seem themselves to be attracted to balloons. The UFO may have shown interest in Mogul. Was ET "checking out" Man's latest aerial acrobatics? They certainly observed our V-2 rockets and our NASA space flights. In a similar way, were they taking a look at what was then our grandest high-altitude balloon? Did they hit or swerve because they got too close? Did "curiosity kill the cat"?
THE CRASH AS A CONFLUENCE OF EVENTS
We can now see that it is distinctly possible that an ET craft can crash.
But no single reason for the crash that has been outlined here can provide the complete explanation for why the craft crashed. Any singly-given explanation has its own particular drawbacks. But a convergence of circumstances and occurrences could account for the incident.
In fact, scientists and insurance risk researchers have long recognized that almost all deaths, injuries and damages result from a mix of individual events that come into simultaneous play. For instance, someone runs in socks on a slippery floor with scissors, falls and is injured. Someone collides with another car while going too fast and talking on the cellphone. Forensic examiners and failure analysis experts often attribute accidents to multiple causes.
In the same way, Roswell's crash was caused by an amalgamation of things. The effects of experimental radar during a violent electric night storm on an unknown craft is itself unknown. Perhaps it was pilot error while averting a Mogul. The precise reasons remain elusive– though they are likely found as a blend of the possibilities offered in this article. But we can be sure of this: It was an extraordinary combination of events that led to the most extraordinary discovery in history.