From the article:
“## How did the UFO crash in 1947 left onlookers puzzled?
The story of the 1953 crash has been retold umpteen times by the locals of the area.”
So which is it? A 1947 crash or a 1953 crash?
this post was submitted on 12 Aug 2024
17 points (69.8% liked)
Jingszo !
325 readers
9 users here now
Strange tales ,bizarre stories ,weird publications ,myths ,legends and folklore
Fact or Fiction ? You Decide
Mythology
Archaeology
Paleontology
Cryptozoology
Extraterrestrial Life
UFO's
The Cosmos
History
Paranormal
In fact anything amusing, curious ,interesting, weird ,strange or bizarre
Rules : Be nice and follow the rules
[](https://mastodon.world/about
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
ChatGPT
Is this news? We know Roswell has more to it than we were told - I'm the biggest skeptic you're likely to find and even I will happily admit there was something going on. Was it a UAP? No, undoubtedly it was some experimental BS. But the government has been pretty open about it being a coverup nontheless. It's just an incident we're never likely to find out the truth of, because at this point anything they say, even a full confession that it was in fact aliens, will be viewed as lies furthering the coverup and yet cause an absolute media firestorm they'll have to deal with.
What did we have in 1947 that could travel 1200 mph. First it was weather balloons then it was radar targets now what is it going to be with that kind of speed.
... Lots of things? Setting aside the tedious nitpicking of the veracity of the 1200 mph claim (which has been done to death and proves little either way), every country in WWII had rockets that could go much faster than that, even greece was experimenting with them. A particular example of a craft that we know was in new mexico at the time of the Roswell crash that could achieve those speeds was the Me 163 Komet, a plane we do not like talking about since it's pretty conclusive that the Nazis broke the sound barrier in one several years before Yeager and the X-1. That the Nazi's had already broken the sound barrier back in WWII was certainly something the US government would want to keep secret in 1947.
(Also, the 163 repeatedly melted it's pilots. Or blew them up. Or reduced them to extra chunky nazi sauce. It was not a 'good plane', but it was very based for the sheer number of skilled nazis it killed. And, our tests of it (the one allied test flight we know about) relied on nazi ground crew and engineers that we had captured to even get the damn thing fueled)
(Interestingly, Yeager broke the sound barrier in the same year as the Roswell crash - it's probably not directly related or anything, just kinda amusing)
Great, now I gotta find a way to work the phrase "extra chunky Nazi sauce" into a sentence this week.
That is the first time I've heard something actually plausible.
The sound barrier isn’t anywhere close to 1200. The best they had at the time were unmanned unguided rockets. Nothing that would have been mistakes for balloons or radar targets or that looked anything like the supposed wreckage displayed.
Sorry, I should have been more clear; the Me 163 was capable of 1200 mph (I think the highest recorded speed was 1300mph, but the pilot spectacularly didn't survive) and we don't talk about it because it was used by the Nazis to break the sound barrier.
And I am also sorry to say, you're just incorrect about the technology at the time. The V2 topped out at over 3000 mph, for example.
In 1947 the Soviet Union launched its first V-2 assembled from German parts.
To think that the US, who acquired far more of the scientists from the Nazi rocket program than the soviet union (who just got the spare parts), was behind them at this point in time is pretty goofy. Do I know what the wreckage was? No, and I wouldn't be allowed to talk about it if I did. But given the sheer amount of cartoonish nonsense the US was attempting at the time, it's not unreasonable for that wreckage to have been anything from the Mogul balloons, an Me163-derived experimental craft, some kind of supersonic blimp (no, that was a real thing. Though as far as I'm aware they never got them off the ground.), targets for high altitude interceptor missiles (that obviously didn't really work yet, but Artemis was started in 1943), a big rock with a tunnel painted on the side, to any other one of a thousand speculative guesses that get less and less likely.
All of these examples would have contained foil, rubber, sticks and whatever 'durable paper' actually means (the best theories I have heard are that it was the precursor to ripstop nylon, or an early mylar or metalized film, which were both being considered for high-altitude, high-speed parachutes at the time.) But really, there are nowhere near enough details to do more than speculate wildly on what it might have been. It's like asking what color dinosaurs were - there's so little information available to us that any answer has an equal likelihood of being the correct answer.
FWIW, Artemis targets would explain both the 1200mph fast moving object and why the wreckage had balloon-like debris, though the claims of balloon-like debris are pretty dubious from what I understand. Additionally it would have been incredibly sensitive information at the time (and probably still is, I mean we still use the U2 because it's almost impossible to shoot the damn things down), absolutely justifying the X-Files-esque coverup that has been reported (again, pretty dubiously) as happening after the incident. I don't think that's what it was (for many reasons, mostly Artemis being a UK program that we have no public records of it being tested in the US outside of WSMR at this time), but it's yet another plausible explanation we're unlikely to ever have confirmed or denied.
Frank Sinatra trying to get a line in before Ava Gardner arrived at Humphrey Bogart's house and snorted the rest?
