Friday, April 8, 2016

Brian Bell proposes an interesting theory about the 1947 Roswell incident

I saw this over at Rich Reynold's UFO Conjectures regarding a series of comments posted by Brian on Kevin Randle's blog.

Brian, who has commented a few times here, proposes an intriguing theory about Roswell. Brian writes that he is not sure that this had been proposed in the past. [I've not seen this either]

Hopefully Brian won't mind if I take the liberty of posting his comments.

Blogger Brian Bell said...
@ Anthony -

Indeed. You wrote:

"So I think that we are at the point where to argue for a conventional explanation we need a specific proposal with some actual evidence to support it."

I'll offer yet another proposal that I doubt has ever been considered. If it has I'd be surprised.

Yes this one is based on documented facts, although the speculative portion is simply mine. It may sound to some as impossible, but no more impossible than the speculations that aliens crashed near Roswell. At least we have facts that could support it.

PART I - FACTS:

1) In 1943 Stalin wanted to pursue the development of a long range multi engine strategic bomber.

2) During 1944 and 1945, three intact US B-29's and one wrecked one were interned with their crews after landing near Vladivostok after bombing raids on Japan.

3) Stalin immediately ordered his aviation industry to "reverse engineer" the B-29 in no more than two years (1947). The project was the TU-4.

4) The TU-4 project was well underway early in 1945. An increase in quality control and sheer perseverance moved things along. The end of the war with Japan made no difference in the production effort. It was full speed ahead. The U.S. had previously not believed the Russians had the capability to clone the B-29, it seemed totally inconceivable. The public Russian debut in the Aviation Day parade in August 1947 changed their minds. The U.S. found itself in a panic situation when they learned the TU-4 was indeed a reality, capable of hitting any target in the U.S. There were reports of “one way” missions by hundreds of TU-4s carrying nuclear bombs attacking the U.S. This forced the U.S. to beef up their Radar systems, surface to air missiles, and interceptor jet fighters.

5) The initial production TU-4's were first flown in May 1947 several months ahead of the July 7 Roswell incident. The US had no knowledge they existed at that time thinking the Russians could not reverse engineer the aircraft.

6) The Soviets were challenged by the complexity of the bomber, and it drove them to evaluate how to develop new alloys and composites to keep the aircraft within targeted weights - they had to come up with ways of making things lighter, which they achieved within 1% of the B-29's weight.

7) The Soviets captured a great deal of German Luftwaffe industrial technology at the close of WWII. That included experimental aircraft material including advanced composites (plastic impregnated wood) and titanium alloys.

8) It is well known that during the Cold War Soviet aircrews and allied communist nations defected by flying their aircraft to the West. The first officially reported incident of a Soviet defection occurred October 9, 1948 when Piotr Pirogov and Anatoly Barsov defected by flying their TU-2 bomber from the USSR to Linz, Austria.

8) The Soviets also began their own atomic weapons research in 1943. US intelligence predicted the Soviets could not achieve the bomb until 1952 while Britain predicted 1953.

9) With the help of German scientists captured at the close of WWII (Soviet Alsos) the Russians shocked the world when they detonated their first A-bomb in 1949. This achievement was facilitated by acquisition of plutonium and uranium between 1945 and 1947.

10) The TU-4 was being developed simultaneously with the Soviet A-bomb and Stalin's plan was to use the reverse engineered plane as the delivery vehicle for his A-bomb over US territory. The TU-4 was intended to be a "one way" non-return strike bomber that could hit any target in the US. It did prove to have the range to accomplish this.
April 8, 2016 at 8:23 AM
Blogger Brian Bell said...
PART II - SPECULATIVE HYPOTHESIS:

1) A Soviet TU-4 was flown from Russia to the US in July 1947 by a flight crew intent on defecting to the West. The planes had already been in full production for two months before the incident and aircraft were available to do so.

2) The aircraft had full capability of accomplishing this long-range flight, and could be flown successfully with a crew of four men (not the full compliment of eleven) consisting of pilot, copilot, navigator, and flight engineer.

3) Soviet aircrews trained in the captured US B-29s beginning in 1945 and had the skill to accomplish this mission since that was what they were intended to do if deployed - a one-way trip.

4) The TU-4 entered US airspace undetected. As an exact clone of the B-29 it was visually not identified as a Soviet aircraft.

5) The Soviets were well aware of the 509th being located at RAAFB and its significance in the Cold War. The defectors were intent on landing their atomic capable TU-4 as close to the 509th as possible and deliver it into the hands of US intelligence.

6) Fuel loss and weather conditions forced the aircraft to land short of RAAFB. The aircraft attempted to ditch but hit the ground once and bounced leaving portions of the fuselage scattered over the Foster Ranch. Perhaps one crew member was even thrown out of the aircraft onto the ranch due to the impact or faulty decompression during decent (hence the rumors Brazel also saw a body in the debris field).

7) The pilot flew several miles more before crash landing near Corona. The plane disintegrated and despite near empty fuel tanks partially exploded leaving a burn mark and the burnt remains of three or four crew members. Perhaps one even survived.

8) Not understanding what they had discovered in the debris field, and concluding no one was looking for this aircraft, Marcel thought the material found was from one of the many saucers currently being reported. Cyrillic symbols or Russian markings on composite wreckage compounded the problem.

9) Following the discovery of the primary crash site, intelligence quickly reversed the initial disc report to mislead the press concerning their discovery.
April 8, 2016 at 8:32 AM
Blogger Brian Bell said...
PART III

10) The Pentagon chose to hide the truth to avoid war panic and embarrassment that their strategic bomber was copied by the Soviets and had entered US airspace undetected.

11) The subject remains classified to this day as a matter of breached US national security, our inability to prevent Soviets from entering our airspace, and pride and embarrassment. Furthermore the records were destroyed just as reported by the USAF and GAO.

12) The testimony of Chester Barton is correct, but he saw the broken remains of a Soviet copy of the B-29.

13) No B-29 crash was reported since it wasn't our aircraft. So it can't be found in USAF crash records.

14) Barton's claim about radioactivity warnings were correct because they didn't know if this plane was carrying the A-bomb or was an attempted preemptive strike against our base at RAAFB.

15) Material was crated and shipped to Wright Field since Air Technical Command is were all foreign material was sent for evaluation. Even the bodies.

16) David's Ramey memo is correct. The "disc" reference in parenthesis is a covert recall to Haut's initial claim it was a disc, and the "victims of the wreck" are the Soviet flight crew.
April 8, 2016 at 8:48 AM

Brian provides an interesting hypothesis that is based on factual accounts of the Soviet's reverse-engineering of the B-29.  The old Military Channel devoted some years ago a whole segment pertaining to this effort.

Now Brian actually goes against the grain concerning those who have supported a Mogul or Mogul-like balloon theory, so it will be equally interesting how those individuals respond as well as the Roswell faithful.

8 comments:

  1. There is an essential problem with Brian's hypothesis:

    If a cloned Soviet B-29 had crashed near Roswell, why would it remain secret even today, with the US Air Force issuing two reports in the mid-90's that the "Roswell incident" was simply Mogul flight #4, with dummies the explanation for bodies seen and recovered?

    Mogul #4 never flew, the "dummies" explanation doesn't fly, and most importantly, it would seem that nearly 70 years after the fact, the US government would have no need to cover up a cloned B-29 crash in New Mexico.

    If that had occurred, it would have been the best way to explain away all the speculation about Roswell that began in 1978/80, and the Roswell theories that have surfaced over the past 35+ years.

    Why would the USAF continue to cover-up a Soviet crash even today? The theory, while interesting, seems to me to have no real merit or logic to it.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Steve, it is something different, is it not? To Brian's credit, he does admit that a lot of it is speculation on his part, as far as pertaining to Roswell.

    Besides, people have been speculating about Roswell for the past 70 years so Brian fits the mold.

    To my way of thinking, Brian's speculative theory has more merit than a crashed UFO with dead ETs lying in the debris field.

    As I commented on Rich Reynold's site, I hate it when something interested is lost in the comments section of any blog.

    ReplyDelete
  3. One question not ask was about fuel capacity and consumption. Even set up as a flying gas can and a jet stream tailwind, I seriously wonder whether a clone B-29 could fly that far. Does anyone know the mileage numbers?

    ReplyDelete
  4. According to wiki and other sites, 3355 mile range. This assumes production model and average weight my best guess.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I think the range you gave is a radius. Most of the ranges put it over 5,000 miles, which probably was a one-way trip. A plane could make it from the USSR to the US with that kind of one-way capability. I find Brian's theory interesting but I am a MOGUList (See SUNlite 5-5 for all my arguments against the nonsense that the Crashologists keep repeating about MOGUL) and lean towards that explanation. Brian would need to find some more supporting documentation for his theory. That being said, his theory is just as valid as the crashologists (what I call those supporting the crashed spaceship theory). His theory is based on speculation and interpretation of witness testimony. At least we know that the NYU team was flying balloons in New Mexico and they did, at some point, use the ML-307 radar reflectors. That is what you see in the photographs and sound like what was found based on the descriptions in the press in 1947.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Hey Tim P.

    Your range seems to make more sense. And other comments that I've seen elsewhere ask the logical questions: Why New Mexico vs that of Japan, Alaska, Hawaii, etc, as a more rationale destination to defect.

    But, as I've stated to Steve Sawyer, Brian does state that his defection to Roswell theory is purely speculative.

    It's different and opens up a new line of argument one way or another. Personally, I agree with the Mogul argument for the reasons that you give in your comment and in Sunlite.

    But as you well know my being from the skeptic mode, I'm not a Roswell enthusiast, but thought Brian's theory should not be lost in the ET shuffle on Kevin's site, but should be given due consideration from both sides.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Tim and Tim:

    Yes you are correct. But let's remember the main thrust of my point was to demonstrate to ET proponents that despite what they claim (or don't want to discuss), they seem never to dig deeper on the prosaic possibilities OTHER than spending energy denying Mogul/NYU.

    Sure Kevin looked into V1-V-2 tests, the flying wing, and other balloon reports. But, Ufologists never go further. After digging into a few possibilities, pro-ET'ers IMMEDIATELY return to the alien scenario while claiming (all along) their explanation is the ONLY possible.

    Roswell is stuck - dead in the water - and without Ufologists showing a willingness to dig deeper outside their paradigm, a confirmed "no question remains answer" will never be found.

    Why not look at a speculative alternative hypothesis? The fact no one has thought of this before is clear evidence (to me) they're stuck in a one-answer world with poor evidence.

    Could such a flight be made?

    As you said, this aircraft was designed to fly a max range of 6200 km or 3347 nm. That range includes 3,000 kg of bombs and a full compliment of eleven crew and all weapons. In this scenario the range would obviously be extended since no armament would be carried including six crew members who weren't needed. Recall that Stalin's plan was to use them as a "one-way" bomber that could strike as deep as Los Angeles without refueling.

    From one of the Soviet's northern most arctic staging grounds (Franz Land), the distance is about 7100 km or 3800 nm - a possible flight path considering it didn't hypothetically make its destination

    However if you leave from Petropavlovsk air base on the Kamchatka Peninsula, which was operational since 1939, the distance is similar - 7425 km - also a possible path.

    Surprisingly this direction takes the aircraft just north (over) Corona, NM and into Roswell in the EXACT directional path of the reported debris field and "second crash site". This is easily mapped using flight calculators.

    However, the objective was to point out that if people want to deny Mogul fine....but don't ignore other possibilities by declaring it wasn't a balloon and therefore had to be alien!

    Cheers...

    ReplyDelete
  8. Brian,

    That's why I liked your speculative hypothesis...it was different with a hint of plausibility. Sure it's fraught with logistical difficulties, but it's plausible at the extreme.

    The fact that ET could only be the answer by the Roswell proponents is cognitive bias on steroids. And after more than 70 years there is nothing to show for it.

    Again, even though your theory is speculative and a counter argument based on your comment's last sentence, I wanted to highlight it for due consideration. I viewed it as a good thought exercise.

    Tim H.

    ReplyDelete