V i s i t o r   r e s p o n s e s <
R e :   

E r n a g e   -   D e c e m b e r   1 1 ,   1 9 8 9

printable version
 Received : 10/27/07  Estimates of size and distance - 1   Roger PAQUAY   

According to your web site, when the craft turned and moved in the direction of the witnesses, it was at a distance of 1 km (0.62 mile or 3,280 feet), a distance that can be measured on the scaled map....  read more 

 Received : 04/20/08  Helicopter noise - 1   Martin SHOUGH   

In this case, an Army officer, Lt. Col. AMOND [now retired], and his wife, stopped their car on what Wim [VAN UTRECHT] describes as a "lonely road" and wound down the window with "ears pricked" to try and detect any sound from an object of evidently large angular size showing details of lit "panels" or windows as well as various other separate lights which circled apparently nearby for up to 8 minutes.....  read more 

 Received : 05/13/08  Helicopter noise - 2   Martin SHOUGH   

It is correct that an inversion will refract sound towards the surface, and the recommendation to avoid flying in an inversion makes sense therefore. But the inference that flying above the top of an inversion will have the inverse effect of abnormally refracting sound upward is unwarranted I think.....  read more 

 Received : 05/17/08  Helicopter noise - 3   Martin SHOUGH   

Re the Ernage case in particular and silent helicopters in general, I looked a bit further into the sound propagation question and helicopter noise sources. Perhaps this will help us decide the merits of the theory. Anyway I've collected some information for future reference - and just because it's interesting.....  read more 

 Received : 05/26/08  Estimates of size and distance - 2   Martin SHOUGH   

I'd like to point out that Mr. PAQUAY treats Lt. Col. AMOND's "2x moon diameter" light as relating to the angular size of a light source, when clearly this should be treated as an impression of the circle of glare (overloaded retina) caused by this "huge" and "brilliant" light shining into the witness's face......  read more 

 Received : 06/05/08  A response from the prime witness   André AMOND, Col. (Ret.)   

I would like to correct the approach of Mr. PAQUAY who claims that the observation of the "spotlight" was made while the craft was 1,000 m from my observation point. This is COMPLETELY WRONG.......  read more 

 Received : 06/17/08  Estimates of size and distance - 3   Roger PAQUAY   

In his response, dated June 5, 2008, Col. AMOND claims that my distance estimation of 1,000 m for the phase during which the craft turned towards him is completely false and that the real distance at that moment was 100 to 200 m. He also disputes my calculations and qualifies them as unscientific.......  read more 

 Received : 06/22/08  Not a helicopter - 1   Wilfried DE BROUWER, Maj. Gen. (Ret.)   

The Belgian airspace is surveyed by four powerful radars, two military and two civilian, which are all interlinked, i.e. any duty controller can select the image of any of these radars at any one time. All radar registrations are recorded and these recordings are kept during a well determined period......  read more 

 Received : 06/23/08  Witness reliability - 1   Jean-Michel ABRASSART   

A little comment about the strawman argument at the end of Wilfried DE BROUWER's email......  read more 

 Received : 06/23/08  Witness reliability - 2   Grégory GUTIEREZ   

In my opinion, the important information in DE BROUWER's e-mail is not in his last paragraph about the reliability of Col. AMOND. Of course human testimony is not always reliable, but Jean-Michel ABRASSART tends to say that it's NEVER reliable. I think he pushes his argument too far here, turning it into some kind of indisputable doctrine.....  read more 

 Received : 06/23/08  Plasma stealth chopper - 1   Jean-Pierre PHARABOD   

Now I am beginning to wonder : how could it be that the four Belgian radars did not detect these objects in the sky which were neither aircraft nor helicopters...  read more 

 Received : 06/23/08  Not a helicopter - 2   Martin SHOUGH   

Gen. DE BROUWER's first-hand testimony confirms not only that no helicopter should have been flying (as previously reported by Col. AMOND) but that, in point of fact, no illicit helicopter or other aircraft was detected by radars covering the area....  read more 

 Received : 06/26/08  Plasma stealth chopper - 2 / Map confusion   Prof. Auguste MEESSEN   

I will try to contribute to this debate by sharing with you that I have the following documents concerning the Ernage case....  read more 

 Received : 07/02/08  Recapitulating   Martin SHOUGH   

Re your reply to Prof. MEESSEN, you're right, the statement about flight plans in the Defence Minister's reply to the Parliamentary question is different from what we understood Gen. DE BROUWER to say....  read more 

 Received : 07/03/08  Estimates of size and distance - 4   Martin SHOUGH   

Thanks for Mr. PAQUAY's follow-up. I was not (as Mr. PAQUAY believes) suggesting that Col. AMOND was "dazzled" to explain a large image. As he says, an "overloaded retina" is not a very good explanation....  read more 

 Received : 07/06/08  Not a helicopter - 3   Wilfried DE BROUWER, Maj. Gen. (Ret.)   

Allow me to clarify a few points. 1. Your statement: "A helicopter is perfectly capable of executing such a manoeuvre". The report of André AMOND suggests that the object was making a tight turn with a considerable angle of bank (45 degrees?) at very slow speed (20-30 km/h?)....  read more 

 Received : 07/14/08  Helicopters noise - 4 / Banking angles - 1   Joe McGONAGLE   

I don't claim to have the detailed aeronautical experience of General DE BROUWER, but during my own military service, I did have some exposure to helicopters as a passenger and as an observer from the ground.

I have had the privilege to fly (as a passenger) in several different models including the Lynx, Scout, Wessex, Puma, Sea King and Chinook during my army service. Of course, I had the opportunity to observe far more than I actually flew in. I have often come across circumstances where I could see a helicopter clearly, but was unable to hear it (possibly due to the prevailing wind direction) yet in many other cases, I heard them some time before I was able to locate them in the sky (or before they appeared from behind trees/hills/etc.). On a few occasions, the sound seemed to come from a different direction than the helicopter was actually in - I'm not sure if this was a ducting effect, or if I was hearing an echo, but not the original source.

As for the banking angle, I think it always looks steeper than it really is. On one flight in a Lynx, I am sure the pilot was deliberately trying to frighten a female passenger (it was a night flight under exercise conditions) and he threw the a/c around more than I have experienced before, though I don't think we actually banked more than 20 degrees at any point.

However, I never flew upside-down in a Lynx as in this image.

Although perhaps just of academic interest, I found the following in relation to helicopter bank angles :

"Airspeed during the turn does not affect load factor, because for a given bank angle the rate of turn decreases with increased airspeed, resulting in no change of centrifugal force. Note that for a 60 degrees bank turn, the load factor for any helicopter is 2 G regardless of its airspeed (Figure 6-2 refers). This means that a 3000 lb helicopter in a 60 degrees bank turn will, in effect, exert 6000 lbs of force on the helicopter structure. Bank angles of up to 30 degrees will produce only moderate increases in load factor that are acceptable under most flight conditions that you will encounter. The load factor rises at an increasing rate at bank angles over 30 degrees, and may produce unacceptable disk load depending upon the helicopter gross weight and the prevailing flight conditions.

The standard rate turn is a turn at the rate of 3 degrees per second. The rate at which a helicopter turns is determined by airspeed and angle of bank. At a given airspeed a specific angle of bank will provide a certain rate of turn. A simple way to estimate the angle of bank required for a standard rate turn at a given airspeed is to take 10% of the airspeed (mph) and add 5 to the quotient or add 7 to the quotient if the airspeed is in nautical miles (kt). For example, at 100 mph, (10 + 5) = 15 degrees of bank; at 80 kt, (8+7)= 15 degrees of bank."

Stoke-on-Trent, UK

[Though his interest in UFOs was sparked in the 1970s, Joe McGONAGLE didn't become an active researcher until 1999, when he set up an Internet email list for people interested in UK ufology. In February 2007 the list had in the order of 100 registered members, including some well-known authors, investigators, and researchers (the list can be joined at ufologyinuk, registration is free). One of Joe’s main areas of focus is the history of British ufology and in particular the role of the MoD in it.]


 Received : 07/14/08  Helicopters noise - 5 / Banking angles - 2   Martin SHOUGH   

Thanks for your input Joe. Yes, clearly it can happen that when the conditions for sound propagation and other witness circumstances are unfavourable people can fail to hear helicopters......  read more 

   See our contact page to find out how you too can contribute.