This letter appeared in the Letters section of the Daily Telegraph dated 10th May 2019 regarding a strange object seen by an RAF training instructor by the name of Dave Henderson as he flew above Loch Ness. No date is given but it is now added to the list of airborne sightings previously discussed in this article.
The author can be contacted at lochnesskelpie@gmail.com
250 feet? Is that height of the airplane? Aviation Safety Magazine says "Over congested areas, which the FAA defines as any congested area of a city, town or settlement, or over any open air assembly of persons, the FAR says you must be at 1000 feet above the highest obstacle within 2000 feet of the airplane."
ReplyDeleteAnd what was the letter on May 9 that is mentioned?
Heh, an RAF jet flew over me at a height of about 100 feet once. They do what they like.
DeleteThe other letter was about Arthur Grant.
“It wasn't a boat, and it was big enough to produce a very long bow wave. So what was it?”A small blobby Nessie seen from the air, of course. Hmmm, OK that's a new one. Anyway, good to see something new and get away from the Ricky Phillips fiasco.
ReplyDeleteMilitary pilots flying low are practised in identifying objects on the surface. I take this as evidence that there was something moving on the surface, not a boat but comparable in size to a boat, or he wouldn't have made that comparison.
DeleteI would hope so. And have good eyesight too. 450 mph at 250 ft, that's fast and low!
DeleteI'm sorry you'll have to circle it for me. I canny see nadda!
ReplyDeleteNo photo was taken. This is just a filler pic.
DeleteAh, thank you.
DeleteI'm wondering how sure he was that it cudnt be a boat?? Cud he be so sure from 250 ft?? If it sank or disappeared yes but he didn't mention that!!
ReplyDeleteI just did some experiments, looking at photos of Loch Ness small boats from viewing distances I calculated to be the equivalent of 250-500 ft (to allow for the slant range being longer) I did the same with some Moray Firth dolphin pictures. In each case it was clear that the boats were boats and the dolphins were not.
DeleteAdmittedly it would be good to know what features he thought were not boat-like. We have his name and location, could someone contact him?
The pilot would be well versed in identifying military targets quickly, of which this was decided not to be one. I think a boat could be identified from that distance by a lot of people, it's not so far.
DeleteYou would know a dolphin by its movements i would imagine, but i think a humped object ploughing through the water could look like a boat, and vice versa.
ReplyDeleteInteresting account but frustrating again due to lack of detail.
ReplyDeleteThe only thing is ,in my opinion, is that if a pilot who looks down from only 250 feet and says that it's not a boat,then it's not a boat.
It's interesting though, and it's from a professional observer.
ReplyDeleteGood 'ol days ;) When you read the reports they're certainly optimistic in that most things get reported in detail but they're not too crazy in their determination to declare 'monster' in every sighting. They're clearly keen to justify their existence and continuation but quite often they'll say something like 'a bit of a disappointing year' or at least acknowledge they haven't met their goal.
ReplyDelete