Aliens On Earth.com Resources for those who are stranded here Bookstore Topics: UFOs - Paranormal - Area 51 - Ghosts - Forteana - Conspiracy - History - Biography - Psychology - Religion - Crime - Health - Geography - Maps - Science - Money - Language - Recreation - Technology - Fiction - Other - New Search... for keyword(s)   in Page Titles in Book Title/Author in Contents of Pages ---other searches--- Metacrawler Yahoo FAST Search Google Altavista Dogpile Inference Find Northern Light IWon.com MSN Search Las Vegas Sun Our Bookstore is OPEN Mothership -> UFO -> Updates -> 2000 -> Apr -> Here

From: Larry Hatch <larryhat@jps.net>
Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2000 20:13:08 -0700
Fwd Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2000 07:04:18 -0400
Subject: Re: Vehicle Shutdown?


 >Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2000 17:34:42 -0400 (EDT)
 >From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
 >Subject: Re: Vehicle Shutdown?
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
 >>Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2000 01:31:29 -0400 (EDT)
 >>Fwd Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2000 07:40:59 -0400
 >>Subject: Vehicle Shutdown?

 >>When someone in his or her car has an experience, the engine
 >>invariably shuts down, lights go out, radios (transmit and/or
 >>receivers) shut down. Invariably they come back on after the
 >>event is over. I've read that the " ... engine suddenly starts
 >>back up ..."

 >>How does this happen? Has anyone asked if the engine started
 >>without the engagement of the ignition switch? It just started
 >>running again by itself? Has anyone heard of the engine starter
 >>being used with or without the aid of the victim? Has anyone
 >>specifically asked this question?

 >It's easier to answer to how the engines might stop. 2 or 3
 >years ago, the Air Force Scientific Advisory Board published a
 >sort of vision statement on the Web of the 21st century AF. This
 >included mention of a high-energy microwave weapon that they
 >planned to mount on planes that could stop internal combusion
 >engines. The plan was to stop vehicles in their tracks so it was
 >easier to bomb them. Your tax dollars at work.

 >The weapon was also reported capable of knocking out
 >instrumentation on other aircraft.

 >It struck me that there would have been no mention of such a
 >weapon unless it had already been tested and they knew it
 >worked. I suppose it is quite possible that this weapon was
 >developed without knowledge of UFO sightings where engines were
 >stopped or where aircraft instrumentation was disrupted, but I
 >doubt it. Rather I think the Air Force took careful notes and
 >set out to retro-engineer the effects. Apparently only 40 years
 >later they have been successful

 >Sometimes associated with reports of engine stoppages are
 >witness reports of feeling a "wave of heat" from the UFO.
 >Something like heat rashes are also sometimes reported. These
 >physiological effects are also what one would expect from a high
 >energy microwave beam. No doubt the Air Force made a note of
 >that as well.

 >The fact that it is relatively easily to retro-engineer engine
 >stoppages, instrumentation interference, and physiological heat
 >effects also reported in UFO cases I consider to be one of the
 >stronger pieces of evidence that UFOs are physically real craft
 >and the Air Force knows it. The effects seem tied to the
 >emission of high-energy microwaves from UFOs.

 >Physicist/engineer James McCampbell has long postulated that
 >these microwave emissions are important clues to the physics
 >underlying the flight of UFOs. Among other things, they also
 >could be tied to the ionization of air with associated electric
 >glows surrounding the objects, and their supersonic flight sans
 >sonic boom.

 >McCampbell also postulated engine restarting due to some pistons
 >still being under compression at the time of stoppage. But I
 >don't see how this theory would explain why the engine would
 >suddenly 'decide' to crank over with the remaining compression
 >only when the UFO left. I've also hand-cranked engines to
 >maximum compression while tuning them and they don't start on
 >their own when released.

 >If the engine didn't completely die in the presence of the UFO,
 >but was instead 'sputtering' or idling very roughly because of
 >interrupted ignition (this is also sometimes reported), then the
 >car 'restarting' or returning to normal once the UFO left would
 >be easier to explain.


Hello Dave, Jim and others:

Dr. Richard Haines has co-authored (with Paul Norman of VUFORS)
an article published in the Journal of Scientific Exploration
(JSE V.14 #1 pp 19-33) which is published by the SSE  (Sturrock,
Stanford et al.)

http://www.scientificexploration.org/

He presents some new evidence indicating that separate observers
saw the Cessna passing with a large green-lit object pacing it
overhead.

According to pilot Valentich, (2-way radio transcript) his
engine began "rough idling... coughing... ".

Presumably, partial loss of power caused the plane to lose
altitude until it crashed at sea, not too far offshore.

I am using data from this article to try and get better
coordinates for the initial encounter with the UFO. It would
seem that the crash site was further East than I had imagined
it, and miles away from the first sighting.

Once again, we have a UFO at close quarters, apparently
affecting a piston engine.


Best wishes

- Larry Hatch