Its no secret the MoD (and Bae) hate the things…

I think the MOD don’t like them because of the number of spurious ‘targets’ that wind turbine blades generate for radar systems…

…can’t think of any reason why BAE Systems would be bothered? :confused:

Have the villagers ganged up on the press with a made up story then?

I can’t explain the ‘lights in the sky’ aspect of the story but if a film crew showed up around here looking for somebody to go on national TV saying they’d seen an alien…

…I’d certainly volunteer. It would make the UFO enthusiasts very happy…..right up until the moment I said it was complete crap and I’d made the whole thing up.

The ‘missing’ turbine blade is missing…..missing from the turbine.

Where did it go? Well, first it fell on the ground…..and then it was taken away by the turbine operators for examination.

But the one in Lincolnshire is a mystery.

Yes, but only if you try really, really hard to ignore the facts.

I’m sure early reports of a ‘missing’ blade were…..er…..misinterpreted. 😉

Amazing REAL footage of the UFO flying into the Wind Turbine!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QL-cRuYAxg0&feature=related

The BBC coverage of the story:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/lincolnshire/7817378.stm

My theory would be that one blade became detached (or failed due to a manufacturing flaw) and while falling under the influence of gravity, and any momentum it had, hit the other blade, bending it…

…but then I’m not a UFO ‘expert’! :rolleyes:

Sorry, not trying to steal your thunder. 🙂

There is a great story about one of the first PR Spitfires. The ‘designer’ wanted to fit two cameras in the fuselage but the officials from the Air Ministry insisted that to do so would upset the centre of gravity. A Spitfire was duly modified with one camera and flown to Boscombe Down for official trials. When the trials were concluded and the officials satisfied a fuselage panel was removed to reveal lead ballast that simulated the load of a second camera. Subsequent PR Spitfires were fitted with two cameras!

I can’t remember the exact details of this story but it would be nice if it were true.

Much of the problem stemmed from the production of Jumos.

Problems with production of the Jumo 205 engines holding up production of high-altitude twin-engined reconnaissance aircraft?

The early PR Spitfires were little more than standard machines without armament, armour or radios but with a camera added; couldn’t any of the standard Luftwaffe fighters have been modified in a similar way to avoid development of special high-altitude aircraft?

It’s always intrigued me how they stopped the diesel from waxing at the low temperatures found at such high altitudes ?

That’s a very good question. I think waxing of diesel is usually a problem with starting an engine in extreme cold…..and they wouldn’t be parking a Ju86 overnight at 50,000 feet!

Careful design, or even heating, of the fuel system would have prevented problems or, as has been suggested, an anti-waxing agent could have been added…

…petrol probably…..older diesels are amazingly tolerant of fuel ‘quality’. :diablo: