Still reading through this report, time permitting, and I gotta say I'm still finding the tone and language strange.
In the section on equipment, there's extensive discussion on what type of camera or computer to use and how a Fujitsu "Lifebook" was a better value than the traditional Toughbook. And even then, they misidentify the Toughbook as a Sony product, while they have always been produced by Panasonic:
External Quote:
Along with our research into cameras, the same effort went into choosing our laptop computers, GPS unit and other electronics. We currently have 2 Fujitsu T1010 "Lifebook" laptop computers for field use. These are highly durable units which are capable of being used in the field as well as an office. While our first choice of a laptop was a Sony Toughbook, we found that the Fujitsu is highly rated for durability, ease of use, and priced substantially lower than the Sony. We have had no problems with these units, and are confident in our choice.
pg: 18
Note, they had "2" computers for field use, which sorta corresponds to the Org chart in the OP, as it appears BAASS had 2 teams under the Investigation Manager, Johnson:
After talking about how they chose various bits of kit, they include a review of the equipment. Like from Consumer Reports or a product review site:
External Quote:
After using out current equipment on the initial deployment to Oregon, we found that most of our equipment served well in the field. Below, are some suggestions as to how certain new equipment or upgrades in current equipment would benefit BAASS investigators.
pg: 21
This is followed by a review, including a discussion of price for some items like range finders:
External Quote:
Laser Range Finder: This is a necessary piece of equipment not yet in our inventory. We encountered very steep and rain soaked inclines, making it impossible to get accurate distance measurements. Range finders in the long range (1200+yards/meters) start at $400.00 and go up to $2800.00 for a military grade unit capable of distanced of 2600 yards/meters.
pg: 22
Again, I'm confused about who this is for. I haven't worked in government so I don't have any knowledge of how progress reports might be written, but would a company charged with a multi-million dollar contract to provide information on UFOs, or anything else, give their Government contract overlords product reviews and discussions of value?
One would think they would either provide the information on UFOs, with things like camera make and model included as needed, or a brief discussion about gearing up for future work. The report seems full of overly verbose and long winded discussions of internal minutia. Does any contract administrator care that a "Lifebook" was chosen over a "Toughbook" for value?
Moving on this paragraph was interesting, as it really sums up what they thought BAASS was going to be doing. As opposed to just fulfilling the original contract to AWWSAP by providing speculative technology papers, BAASS anticipated actually getting recovered UFO pieces to reverse engineer:
External Quote:
The BAASS mission being to identify and exploit technology discovered through the investigation of Unexplained Aerial Phenomenon (UAP) is directly impacted by the intelligence threat. Many of the technological areas illustrated in the above table have direct applicability to BAASS. These technological areas are heavily targeted by both State sponsored intelligence agencies as well as private enterprise.
pg: 48
Earlier in the report, it describes how BAASS planed to build a "vault" for the sample they expected to acquire:
External Quote:
The need for a highly secure underground vault operated by BAASS became apparent in line with a BAASS priority to pursue and acquire recovered hardware and biological samples from the corporate world and/or from private individuals and groups located elsewhere, including Brazil.
Further, the BAASS administrator during the month of May designed and created architectural plans for a 5000 sq.ft underground vault with 3 foot thick walls, ceiling and floor with a concrete access tunnel leading to multiple security doors, at least one ofwhich comprises a thick vault steel door. The entire facility will be located underground at the Bigelow Aerospace facility with over 15-20 feet of earth above the structure. Any surface structures protruding from the ground will be extensively camouflaged.
pg: 3
Recall that a statement was entered into the congressional hearings by Rep Burchett, making the claim that BAASS had a Technology Transfer Agreement (TTA) with Lockheed-Martin for supposed UFO samples. According to the source, the CIA stoped the TTA from moving forward. Link below to thread on this claim.
This report confirms at least the notion that someone at BAASS thought they were going to get UFO parts from somewhere, possibly including Bigelow himself. This quote is supposedly Vallee recalling a 2009 conversation where Bigelow complained he wasn't getting the UFO parts from Lockheed he had been promised:
External Quote:
2 October 2008 — Bob Bigelow tells Jacques Vallee that the AAWSAP project has officially kicked off, but the sponsor (DIA) hasn't delivered any access that was promised. Opening certain doors, intros to potentially key personnel at contractors that may have worked on UAP in the past, etc. None of that happened as of that time.
Above quote from Vallee's
Forbidding Science, Pacific Heights Vol. 5 2000-2009 and pulled from Shellenberger's UAP Timeline:
https://pdfhost.io/v/gR8lAdgVd_Uap_Timeline_Prepared_By_Another
If anything, the idea that a brand new company, BAASS, with a contract to provide speculative tech papers was better equipped to reverse engineer UFO parts than the leading military/aerospace contractor, Lockheed, is farcical.
https://www.metabunk.org/threads/cl...er-of-meta-materials-from-crashed-ufos.13773/
