Travis Walton case: Crew boss confesses hoax

[John J.]

The first part of the Phoenix Lights (the V-shaped craft with 7 lights) fits a hoax theory better than the accepted skeptical theory (planes) imo.

Is it possible that lights in the sky were not physically connected to a single structure, but that witnesses perceived them as being lights on a single object? In the thread "Major UFO experiences are specific to the observer" Mick West raised the phenomenon of illusory contours (post #3), @flarkey's post #9 tied this in with "flying triangle" reports.

It is probable that some of the Hudson Valley flying triangle reports c. 1982-1984 were due to light aircraft flying in formation.
There had been reports of a large triangular or V-shaped UFO;

[in 1982] Over a month later, on June 25th, the NY Newburgh Evening News and the Beacon NY News reported another slew of sightings, specifically noting, "strangely enough, all of the incidents came on Thursday nights between 8:30 and 9:30PM." State police were quick to tell panicked callers that they had already tracked the objects to Stormville Airport after the last sighting (on April 29), telling them "… a group of professional pilots who were using small planes to practice close formation flying at night. [The authorities] said that the pilots usually [to] practice [at] night and were seen by a trooper landing at Stormville Airport shortly after state police received numerous calls wondering about the lights."

"Hudson Valley: How the media really reacted to a 1980s UFO flap", Nexus Newsfeed.com, Nick Coffin-Callis https://nexusnewsfeed.com/article/u...the-media-really-reacted-to-a-1980s-ufo-flap/ (author's italics).

From the same article

The next wave began much like the first, in the early months of 1983. On March 4th, the Poughkeepsie Journal ran a headline reading "UFO flipped… and flashed…but it was only a stunt." The article, written by Helene Maichle, quotes State Trooper Frank Dunning, "I got so many calls I put my investigative skills to work," explaining that he "found [that] a team of stunt pilots from the Stormville Airport take to the skies every Thursday night to perform their maneuvers."
... ...
[In 1983] [initially quoting amateur UFO investigator Philip Imbrogno]] "...A number reported seeing a structure, some kind of gray shape," though [local journalist E.B.] Waizer adds "although several witnesses said they could make out the forms of five separate airplanes and hear the sound of propellers, other witnesses adamantly claim they saw one wedge-shaped object and that it hovered and darted in a manner unlike any airplane."
... ...
[1984] Investigator Dick Ruhl describes his encounter in volume 32, issue 6 of the APRO Journal: "We watched in utter amazement as the two objects glided extremely slowly and maneuvered about themselves, constantly changing from white as they approached us, to red as they turned away and then from the side, the red, green-blue and white lights appeared. They finally formed up into a huge boomerang-shape and it was then that I saw some light reflected on the bodies of the six aircraft. We knew we had the evidence on the 'Stormville pilots'," Ruhl and his associate Ricchie Petracca then staked out the airport and watched the planes land. Ruhl took a photo of one of the plane's tail IDs – N-76106 – which at the time was registered to an Ivan P, Hersh.

See also "The Hudson Valley UFO Hoax: Unravelling the Mystery of Triangular Objects in the New York Sky", UFO Report website https://uforeport.com/the-hudson-va...ry-of-triangular-objects-in-the-new-york-sky/

The evidence for a mundane explanation is compelling, I think, but nonetheless some witnesses believed they saw large boomerang/ chevron/ triangle -shaped craft. (A similar explanation might apply to some sightings during the Belgian "flying triangle" wave of 1989-1992).

Speculation on how the hoax was made: [Quoting Michael Rogers]

There's only one thing I've done in ufology in the last few 20 years or so, and that's the Phoenix Lights. The Phoenix Lights were a hoax. I have proof... The first event was it was a large thing that I am convinced now was more than likely a government creation. It was a third of a mile in diameter, but that could be created, especially with government money.

@jdog raised the improbability of this in post #26.

Rogers claims, after 20 years of research, that there was a purpose-built hoax UFO a third of a mile wide
(approx. 587 yards, 1760 feet/ 536 metres). Once built, it seems it was used once, Rogers thinks to test people's reactions to UFOs.

Rogers believes his notional hoax UFO was a lighter-than air aircraft, which might be a fair assumption for such a large structure, but if it maintained a chevron/ V-shape across over 580 yards it must have had significant structural rigidity (same applies for any hypothetical framework on which lights might have been mounted, suspended below a balloon or airship).

The largest steerable aircraft ever built was the airship Hindenburg, 245.3 metres/ 803' 10" long. Less than half the width of the hoax UFO
(Wikipedia, Hindenburg-class airship https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hindenburg-class_airship).
The Chinese spy balloon shot down by the USAF in 2023 was reported to be

...up to 200 feet [60.96 metres] tall for the actual balloon

by NORAD commander Air Force General Glen VanHerck ("Chinese spy balloon was 200 feet tall, may have had explosives: NORAD", New York Post 06 Feb 2023, Caitlin Doombos and Emily Crane, archived https://web.archive.org/web/2023020...023/02/06/chinese-spy-balloon-was-200ft-tall/

I don't think Mr Rogers' estimates of the claimed hoax UFO's size are plausible. He certainly wasn't the sole (or main) builder of such a craft, if it ever existed (which must be very doubtful indeed). His description of the hoax UFO might be taken as evidence that he had little knowledge of the scale of aircraft, and was unlikely to have built one himself.
It must be wildly implausible that such an extraordinary aircraft was built, even by the US government, to test people's reactions to UFOs.

Edited to add: To clarify, I think it's entirely possible, maybe probable, that Rogers played a part in (or at least knew details of) a hoaxed abduction of Travis Walton. But I'm not at all sure about the accuracy of everything he said to his daughter. He was probably a deeply unreliable source, and perhaps continued hankering after some sort of "international man of mystery"-type notoriety.

 

[Charlie Wiser]

Is it possible that lights in the sky were not physically connected to a single structure, but that witnesses perceived them as being lights on a single object? In the thread "Major UFO experiences are specific to the observer" Mick West raised the phenomenon of illusory contours (post #3), @flarkey's post #9 tied this in with "flying triangle" reports.

Yes, some witnesses perceived them as individual lights and others were convinced they were a single structure that blocked the stars.

From the MUFON and NUFORC reports and other interviews, it can be hard to know if the witnesses are referring to the first or second event. The second (flares) got most of the press coverage because there was lots of video of it. And those lights were sometimes referred to as V-shaped because they weren't always in a straight line (as the flares fell). So if someone saw the V-shaped object(s) then watched the news reporting on the flares, they might assume it was the same event, or (in the case of witnesses coming forward years later) they might misremember the time - such as reporting they saw something at 10PM when in fact they saw the 8PM sighting.

I don't think Mr Rogers' estimates of the claimed hoax UFO's size are plausible. He certainly wasn't the sole (or main) builder of such a craft, if it ever existed (which must be very doubtful indeed). His description of the hoax UFO might be taken as evidence that he had little knowledge of the scale of aircraft, and was unlikely to have built one himself.

I don't think it can be true that it was 1/3 mile wide, although that size - so far - comes from his pre-confession interviews.

 

[Ann K]

I find it hard to believe that a single huge structure such as described (1) existed at all, and (2) was deliberately flown over Phoenix, a huge, busy metropolitan area where even a largish kite would certainly be a traffic hazard if it came down. If there were ever such a creation, the state of Arizona has plenty of near-empty desert in which to fly it.

We've previously discussed the tendency of people to see groups of lights as a single object, and something like planes, either deliberately flying in formation or just perceived that way from some vantage points (like constellations) would be a much more probable explanation. I'll point out that Phoenix has a very busy airport, and I've clearly seen at least half a dozen planes in the air at once (in daytime) visible from South Mountain.

 

[MapperGuy]

Rogers thinks to test people's reactions to UFOs.

The government does not need to test peoples reactions to UFOs.
Everytime someone sees something they THINK is a Flying Saucer, but is just an airplane/planet/satellite, they have another example of a persons reaction to a UFO.
No expensive test article needed, and the nice folks at MUFON to do the collecting of their reactions at no cost to the government.

The suggested size is totally implausible. Where was it built, how long did it take to build it, how was it kept hidden during the building process, how was it disposed of after the flight, where are the remains?
That would simply be too large an endeavor to hide.

 

[Charlie Wiser]

I find it hard to believe that a single huge structure such as described (1) existed at all, and (2) was deliberately flown over Phoenix, a huge, busy metropolitan area where even a largish kite would certainly be a traffic hazard if it came down. If there were ever such a creation, the state of Arizona has plenty of near-empty desert in which to fly it.

This is where we may benefit from a separate thread, in the hope that people will read before posting. Mike did not claim to have deliberately flown anything over Phoenix, quite the opposite.

We've previously discussed the tendency of people to see groups of lights as a single object, and something like planes, either deliberately flying in formation or just perceived that way from some vantage points (like constellations) would be a much more probable explanation. I'll point out that Phoenix has a very busy airport, and I've clearly seen at least half a dozen planes in the air at once (in daytime) visible from South Mountain.

Some witnesses around the airport(s) distinguished between flights around the airport and the V-shaped lights they saw (again, for the first part of the sighting). Note the calculated speed - when assuming they were planes - was ~400MPH in part because the Prescott sightings were assigned to 8PM, then Phoenix 15-20 minutes later. But there are several witnesses that saw them in Prescott much earlier, at 6PM or "slightly after dark" or "it was still light" (sunset was around 6:30PM). That's 80 miles in 90 minutes not 15 minutes. My feeling is that people heard there were two sightings - at 8PM and 10PM - then assigned their own sighting to 8PM even if it was actually 7PM or just after sunset or whatever.

The times generally are often vague in these reports (usually rounded up to the hour), which is astonishing to me. (If I saw a genuine UFO the first thing I'd do is check the exact time, to help with corroboration and identification later... then again, I've never seen one that stunned me so I don't know how I'd react in the moment.)

From some NUFORC reports:

Observed 5 white lights approaching from the north west at what appeared to be a low level but rising as they approached. 3 lights in front in a triangular pattern, followed by 2 lights to the rear forming large triangle. Lights went out as passed over. No sound.
The lights moved at a relatively slow pace in comparison to commercial jet traffic in the area [nr Prescott airport] and as the lights passed overhead they went out as though they were all on the front edges of the object and were obscured by the object as it passed.

NUFORC UFO Sighting 2072

The craft was viewed by us from a straight line north to south. It never moved erratically, nor did it make a sound. It was totally quiet. Our viewing sight was approximately 2 miles from the craft. We witnessed a plane in landing formation pass right over the object. It never adjusted its course. It didn't see it... This craft had no visible means of propulsion and was totally quiet. It never changed course and went straight south towards Tucson, Az.

NUFORC UFO Sighting 2124

It was clearly obvious that it was a craft of some sort. We could see the area between the lights which had a triangular shape, was solid and was a different shade (darker) of black than the night sky. It moved towards Sky Harbor airport as it moved away from us. It made no noise as it went by. We are in the flight path of Sky Harbor and look at the planes as they go over (about 5000 feet). In comparison, you could of lined 3-4 jet airliners end to end and hung them underneath this thing.

NUFORC UFO Sighting 2221

Since we were right by Sky Harbor Airport, there were commercial planes flying East and West. The red lights seemed to be lower in altitude and oblivious to the fact that it was flying directly toward commercial aircraft traffic. They were in a V formation, three red lights in front, two red lights behind and to each side.

NUFORC UFO Sighting 2104

witnessed from south west corner of valley. came in from the north hovered near camelback mountain and moved over sky harbor airport and disappeared behind south mountains.

NUFORC UFO Sighting 49562

The lights first appeared to me to be over the airport in a wide formation and traveling in a southerly direction, roughly over the interstate. There is no question that they were anomalous, they got my attention immediately, and I was concerned enough about distractedly weaving into other traffic while observing them, that I pulled off the interstate to watch them go overhead...It was very difficult to judge the altitude of the objects, as they were never more than pinpoints of light moving very slowly; if I had to guess, I would say they were at very high altitude.

NUFORC UFO Sighting 8345 [witness is a commercial pilot]

Scottsdale Airpark is right in the same area and I've seen hundreds of planes coming in and out of that airport and none ever flown in that formation. And I would not say commercial airplanes because none have every flown in that direction either...

NUFORC UFO Sighting 117331

It was very dark against the dim lit sky, you could see it was in a "V" shape and you could not see the sky between the lights... We got out of our truck and watched it for at least 10 more minutes as it was moving towards Phoenix it looked to be right over Phoenix International Raceway going towards Sky Harbor International Airport. We could see the airplanes, coming and going from the airport, and they were much faster and higher up.

NUFORC UFO Sighting 61341

 

[Charlie Wiser]

The government does not need to test peoples reactions to UFOs.
Everytime someone sees something they THINK is a Flying Saucer, but is just an airplane/planet/satellite, they have another example of a persons reaction to a UFO.
No expensive test article needed, and the nice folks at MUFON to do the collecting of their reactions at no cost to the government.

I think people have a fundamental misunderstand of what's going on here. If we start with the hypothesis that Mike Rogers created the hoax, his previous "speculations" that the government did it to test people's reactions are obvious nonsense.

 

[Ann K]

But there are several witnesses that saw them in Prescott much earlier, at 6PM or "slightly after dark" or "it was still light" (sunset was around 6:30PM).

It's a mountainous area, so I think the apparent "sunset" is going to depend upon whether you're in a mountain shadow, or at a higher altitude in sunlight.

 

[Charlie Wiser]

It's a mountainous area, so I think the apparent "sunset" is going to depend upon whether you're in a mountain shadow, or at a higher altitude in sunlight.

That's true. One report that sticks out to me, from a pilot (he was on the ground), has the time as 18:00. All the times on NUFORC are 24-hr format, and I'm sure people must sometimes get it wrong, but I don't think a pilot would accidentally write 18:00 if he meant 8PM. So, in Prescott he saw something around 6PM when "it was still light".

There's no possible way to solve this without ignoring at least some details of some reports, since as a whole they're contradictory. The "planes in formation" theory contradicts some reports, too. But if this 6PM report is correct, it makes the hoax theory possible because it matches a craft flying at wind speed.

I'm hoping to get a lot more details very soon.

 

[Robert Sheaffer]

Yes, some witnesses perceived them as individual lights and others were convinced they were a single structure that blocked the stars.

From the MUFON and NUFORC reports and other interviews, it can be hard to know if the witnesses are referring to the first or second event. The second (flares) got most of the press coverage because there was lots of video of it. And those lights were sometimes referred to as V-shaped because they weren't always in a straight line (as the flares fell). So if someone saw the V-shaped object(s) then watched the news reporting on the flares, they might assume it was the same event, or (in the case of witnesses coming forward years later) they might misremember the time - such as reporting they saw something at 10PM when in fact they saw the 8PM sighting.




I don't think it can be true that it was 1/3 mile wide, although that size - so far - comes from his pre-confession interviews.

There is no way that the first Phoenix Lights sighting was a hoax by Mike Rogers, or anyone else. First, it crossed almost the entire state of Arizona, by most accounts in less than an hour, suggesting a speed of about 400 mph. So Planes.

Second, as we can see from this link, the objects changed positions with respect to each other, ruling out any kind of rigid structure. So they're planes.

Third, after the Triangle passed Phoenix, it followed Interstate 10, then disappeared shortly before 9:00. That's because the planes landed at Davis-Monthan AFB in Tucson. They were part of an Air National Guard training program called Operation Snowbird. That was the last day of Snowbird for the year, so all planes had to return, and all flares that were going to be dropped had to drop that night.

I don't know why Mike's hoax lights would follow I-10 to Tucson, then disappear, but I know why planes would do so. And even if the longest estimate of the triangle sighting is correct, 3 hours, it still implies a ground speed of over 100 MPH. A neat trick if Mike could make that happen.

https://badufos.blogspot.com/2014/01/arizonas-amazing-telepathic-flying.html

 

[Charlie Wiser]

There is no way that the first Phoenix Lights sighting was a hoax by Mike Rogers, or anyone else. First, it crossed almost the entire state of Arizona, by most accounts in less than an hour, suggesting a speed of about 400 mph. So Planes.

Something was seen in the north, but it doesn't match the other reports (of course, many reports don't match each other). There is a sighting around Prescott at 6PM, so that's 2 hours to get to Phoenix around 8PM.

Second, as we can see from this link, the objects changed positions with respect to each other, ruling out any kind of rigid structure. So they're planes.

Perhaps it wasn't a rigid structure. At that size, it's highly unlikely that it was rigid.

Third, after the Triangle passed Phoenix, it followed Interstate 10, then disappeared shortly before 9:00. That's because the planes landed at Davis-Monthan AFB in Tucson. They were part of an Air National Guard training program called Operation Snowbird. That was the last day of Snowbird for the year, so all planes had to return, and all flares that were going to be dropped had to drop that night.

There doesn't seem to be flight records of these particular flights?

I don't know why Mike's hoax lights would follow I-10 to Tucson, then disappear, but I know why planes would do so. And even if the longest estimate of the triangle sighting is correct, 3 hours, it still implies a ground speed of over 100 MPH. A neat trick if Mike could make that happen.

https://badufos.blogspot.com/2014/01/arizonas-amazing-telepathic-flying.html

The wind was going south so the UFO, if carried by the wind, would go south.

The last timestamped sighting was 10 miles north of Casa Grande at 8:42PM. Prescott to Casa Grande is 120 miles as-the-UFO-flies, or 60mph if we generously change the first sighting from 6PM to 6:42PM.

If one can assume planes and then make them fit by discounting some reports, it's only logical that one can assume a hoax craft and then make it fit by discounting some reports.

 

[Mendel]

If there was a black triangular balloon, for practical reasons it must've been smaller and lower.
The altitude might be estimated from where it was visible.

 

[jdog]

Was kind of skeptical about the stability of a triangle- or v-shaped balloon structure until I came across this The War Zone story: We Talk Giant V-Shaped Airships, Space, And Phoenix Lights With JP Aerospace's Founder

JP Aerospace's John Powell says that while his company has designed vehicles for the Department of Defense, some of which went on to the 'black' world, his company was ultimately not responsible for the Phoenix Lights incident...

We have built several airships and other vehicles for various DOD agencies. None of our programs were classified. However, after completion and delivery, our vehicles entered into programs of which I have no knowledge.

We were testing vehicles at the time of the Phoenix lights incident, however, I can absolutely say that JPA was not, nor [was] our equipment, involved.

Turns out NASA built some triangular lighter-than-air systems like this Inflatable Micrometeoroid Paraglider (IMP) as far back as the early 1960s for high-altitude/low-orbit research.

 

[John J.]

Perhaps it wasn't a rigid structure. At that size, it's highly unlikely that it was rigid.

If we're still talking about a third of a mile, 536 metres, the size is utterly unrealistic, rigid or not.

It's probably not physically impossible, but it would be a major engineering and manufacturing feat (particularly if we accept it's non-rigid but maintains a chevron shape across half a kilometre).
It is not something a single person or a group of hoaxers without serious involvement in balloon manufacture (and the relevant resources) could do.
Something only 10% of the width, a meagre (approx.) 50 metres, would almost certainly be outside the scope of such a group.

The world's largest passenger hot air balloon, the Cameron Z-750, is approx. 40 m in height
"The world's largest passenger hot-air balloon", Cameron Balloons, Hannah Cameron https://www.cameronballoons.co.uk/articles/the-worlds-largest-passenger-hot-air-balloon

High-altitude helium balloons can be much larger, but they reach their maximum diameters at very high altitude and might not be readily observable. It is claimed the largest balloon ever was the Winzen Research Inc. SF3-579.49-035-NSC-01, which had a gore length (roughly, the height of constituent vertical envelope panels when laid flat) of 239.49 m: But it never flew.

There were no photographs of the attempt and the flight was "aborted on launch pad" on October 1, 1975.

Guinness World Records, Largest Balloon https://www.guinnessworldrecords.com/world-records/63129-largest-balloon
(If it didn't fly I don't see how it qualifies as the largest balloon, lack of photos seems strange, but what Guinness World Records says is up to them).

Let's say the hypothetical balloon is 500m across its longest dimension, a little less than Rogers' estimate. It is visibly chevron-shaped (or supports a 500m framework carrying lights in a chevron distribution- again, this would have to have structural rigidity over 500m in its longest dimension yet be very light. Very challenging engineering).
If the length from leading edge to trailing edge is only 20 metres- one twenty-fifth of the wingspan*- that gives a surface area of approx. 10,000 square metres in the plan view.
Of course the balloon would have to have a vertical dimension as well as it contains gas to lift it, so the top surface would be curved, its area larger than this. There has to be an underside, so there would be well over 20,000 square metres of material.
An American football field is 5,350 square metres.

Where did it land? Why wasn't it found? It's a non-Roswell.

Was kind of skeptical about the stability of a triangle- or v-shaped balloon structure until I came across this The War Zone story: We Talk Giant V-Shaped Airships, Space, And Phoenix Lights With JP Aerospace's Founder

JP Aerospace is an aerospace company, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JP_Aerospace
Its largest chevron shaped balloon is the JP Ascender 175, each boom is approx. 177 feet, 54 metres long. Its width (between the trailing ends of the two booms) is less than this.

JP Aerospace https://jpaerospace.com/ascender175.html

The longest dimension of this striking balloon, built by an aerospace company specialising in this type of craft, is a little over 10% of Rogers' estimate of his chevron's width (IIRC he says "diameter", I am making an assumption that means width).

Rogers builds the largest flying artefact ever by a huge margin, something that must take great expertise, and uses it for a one-off hoax.
The evidence for this is the verbal testimony of a man whose accounts of other UFO-linked events (Walton's abduction) are highly questionable.

If Rogers is responsible for a flying artefact that he used to fake a UFO -something for which there's no material evidence whatsoever- it simply isn't sensible to link that "craft" to anything of the size he describes for the (claimed) Phoenix lights chevron, or even anything a substantial fraction of that size.


*Almost certainly an unrealistically low estimate. How such a narrow non-rigid envelope, 500 metres across but only 20m deep, is meant to maintain a chevron shape and not flap about is anyone's guess. A deeper (leading edge to trailing edge) wing, or perhaps a triangular shape, might help, but would require much more material for the envelope: A vast balloon, several times larger than any flying artefact ever built. Knocked up by Rogers, in secret, and he never takes the credit for this record-breaking technological marvel.

 

[Robert Sheaffer]

Something was seen in the north, but it doesn't match the other reports (of course, many reports don't match each other). There is a sighting around Prescott at 6PM, so that's 2 hours to get to Phoenix around 8PM.



Perhaps it wasn't a rigid structure. At that size, it's highly unlikely that it was rigid.



There doesn't seem to be flight records of these particular flights?



The wind was going south so the UFO, if carried by the wind, would go south.

The last timestamped sighting was 10 miles north of Casa Grande at 8:42PM. Prescott to Casa Grande is 120 miles as-the-UFO-flies, or 60mph if we generously change the first sighting from 6PM to 6:42PM.

If one can assume planes and then make them fit by discounting some reports, it's only logical that one can assume a hoax craft and then make it fit by discounting some reports.

Rich Contry, who was on I-40 north of Prescott, wrote:
"As the formation came towards me I stopped my car and got out with my binocs to check out what this was. As it came towards me, I saw 5 aircraft with there running lights (red and green) and the landing lights (white) on. They were also flying fairly slow and in the delta formation. As they went over me I could see stars going between the aircraft so it could not have been one large ship."

"Additionally, we discover there were more witnesses to aircraft in formation that night:"

...At 8:30 p.m. the cockpit crew of an American West 757 airliner at 17,000 feet near Lake Pleasant, Ariz., noticed the lights off to their right and just above them.

"There's a UFO!" co-pilot John Middleton said kiddingly to pilot Larry Campbell. They queried the regional air-traffic-control center in Albuquerque, N.M. A controller radioed back that it was a formation of CT-144s flying at 19,000 feet.

Overhearing the exchange, someone claiming to be a pilot in the formation radioed Middleton. "We're Canadian Snowbirds flying Tutors," a man said...

But Capt. Michael Perry, squadron logistics officer for the Snowbirds, denied that any planes were in Arizona that month.

That account probably confuses the Canadian Snowbirds with Operation Snowbird, an Air National Guard training program, based at Davis-Monthan AFB in Tucson.

https://www.astronomyufo.com/UFO/azconc.htm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GvKR7wbB1Nk


"Mitch Stanley, 21, spends several nights a week in his backyard with a 10-inch telescope, exploring the night sky. He's owned the telescope for about a year, and has learned the sky well. With its 10-inch mirror, the telescope gathers 1,500 times as much light as the human eye. And with the eyepiece Stanley was using on the night of March 13, the telescope gave him 60 times the resolving power of his naked eye.

That night Mitch and his mother, Linda, were in the backyard and noticed the lights coming from the north. Since the lights seemed to be moving so slowly, Mitch attempted to capture them in the scope. He succeeded, and the leading three lights fit in his field of vision. Linda asked what they were.
"Planes," Mitch said.
It was plain to see, he says. What looked like individual lights to the naked eye actually split into two under the resolving power of the telescope. The lights were located on the undersides of squarish wings, Mitch says. And the planes themselves seemed small, like light private planes.

Stanley watched them for about a minute, and then turned away. It was the last thing the amateur astronomer wanted to look at.

"They were just planes, I didn't want to look at them," Stanley says when he's asked why he didn't stare at them longer. He is certain about what he saw: "They were planes. There's no way I could have mistaken that."
https://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/news/the-great-ufo-cover-up-6422930/

 

[Charlie Wiser]

Where did it land? Why wasn't it found? It's a non-Roswell.

I agree the size of 1/3 mile is implausible. However, it's not at all implausible that it wasn't found. In fact, it may well have been found - but that doesn't mean anybody associated it with the Phoenix Lights.

 

[Charlie Wiser]

Rich Contry, who was on I-40 north of Prescott, wrote:

Yes, exactly as I said - you can pick out some reports to support planes, and I can pick out some reports to support a relatively slow-moving single object.

 

[NorCal Dave]

If Rogers is responsible for a flying artefact that he used to fake a UFO -something for which there's no material evidence whatsoever- it simply isn't sensible to link that "craft" to anything of the size he describes for the (claimed) Phoenix lights chevron, or even anything a substantial fraction of that size.

The problem is were' dealing with the 2nd hand accounts of an unreliable source. @Charlie Wiser has shared accounts of Rogers making claims of this overly large floating UFO. According to his daughter, he confessed to faking this UFO. So, the UFO, regardless of size, is fake according to Roger's daughter. Therefore, any description of it's size and shape is part of the fake UFO story he was promulgating.

It's the problem of dealing with an unreliable source, or what my wife with a Master's in Creative Writing calls an "unreliable narrator". We don't know what to believe and what not to believe. I found a similar issue reading through Skinwalkers at the Pentagon. Parts of it sounded believable and others were bonkers. I chose to go with the parts of the story that aligned with FOIA documents. Does that mean that other parts about werewolves were equally believable?

IF Rogers confessed to hoaxing the Walton abduction, we have ample evidence that they both profited from that hoax and Charlie, among others, made a compelling argument as to how it was done. The confession of a hoax fits a lot of what we know and suspected, like parts of Skinwalkers at the Pentagon fit in with known FOIA documents.

IF Rogers is also responsible for hoaxing the Phoenix Lights, we should expect some other evidence to confirm that.

 

[JMartJr]

Yes, exactly as I said - you can pick out some reports to support planes, and I can pick out some reports to support a relatively slow-moving single object.

Fair enough. I wonder though if it is significant that the people who had the best view -- with telescope, say -- saw planes, not a single object?

Or is my memory of that part of this case in error?

 

[Charlie Wiser]

IF Rogers confessed to hoaxing the Walton abduction, we have ample evidence that they both profited from that hoax and Charlie, among others, made a compelling argument as to how it was done. The confession of a hoax fits a lot of what we know and suspected, like parts of Skinwalkers at the Pentagon fit in with known FOIA documents.

IF Rogers is also responsible for hoaxing the Phoenix Lights, we should expect some other evidence to confirm that.

This is why I wanted a separate thread but I don't know if I can do that myself - to my knowledge the concept that it was a hoax (by anyone) has never been seriously considered. It's planes or it's aliens.

 

[Charlie Wiser]

Fair enough. I wonder though if it is significant that the people who had the best view -- with telescope, say -- saw planes, not a single object?

Or is my memory of that part of this case in error?

We don't know that what they saw was the same thing as the V-shaped object with lights that is now called the Phoenix Lights. There are planes all over the State at all times of the day and night.

It's also not clear that anyone viewing through a telescope saw planes. They basically said the lights resolved into more lights.

 

[John J.]

I agree the size of 1/3 mile is implausible.

It's more than implausible. Half that size would still make it the largest flying thing ever built by humanity (at least in terms of its longest dimension). That isn't a trivial fact.

A tenth of 1/3 mile (which would be approx. 58.7 yards, 53.6 metres) would be implausible; that brings it down to being "only" about 20% bigger than the largest passenger-carrying hot air balloon, or about the same length as the booms of JP Aerospace's JP Ascender 175.
The Cameron Z-750 hot air balloon and JP Ascender 175 are built by, respectively, professional ballooning and aerospace research companies.

Amateurs have built practical large balloons, but not on this scale as far as I know. Two couples and their four children escaped from DDR in a homemade balloon, envelope approx. 25 m tall, 20 m across in 1979 (Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_Germany_balloon_escape).

I take the point that a smaller balloon or other flying craft could be used to fake a UFO, and there's plenty of evidence on this forum of very modest (even party) balloons, and small hobby drones, being misidentified. But if Mr Rogers built a fake UFO, it seems very unlikely it would have been in the tens of metres scale, and certainly not in the hundreds of metres. Which might raise the question, if by coincidence he flew his UFO around the same time as the A-10s were dropping their flares, how can we be sure that Rogers' hoax UFO played any role at all?
Assuming it existed. And he flew it, by coincidence, at that time and place.

We don't know anything about alien craft (if they exist) but we do know a fair bit about balloons, airships, gliders and aeroplanes.
Whatever the stories of the 1890s airship flap and pulp fiction, very large aircraft are unlikely to be cobbled together by a lone amateur.
Such a craft would be intrinsically newsworthy, and perhaps a viable income stream (interviews, promotional purposes etc.)

 

[Charlie Wiser]

Fair enough. I wonder though if it is significant that the people who had the best view -- with telescope, say -- saw planes, not a single object?

Or is my memory of that part of this case in error?

I am just now reading that the witness who saw planes with his telescope was a child.

 

[Nemon]

The longest dimension of this striking balloon, built by an aerospace company specialising in this type of craft, is a little over 10% of Rogers' estimate of his chevron's width (IIRC he says "diameter", I am making an assumption that means width).

Even though the article is of course interesting and provides some technical background, it would have been interesting to hear from John Powell whether he considers an aircraft of this type and size feasible or potentially useful at all, regardless of the fact that the Phoenix Lights seem to have been convincingly debunked.

 

[JMartJr]

I am just now reading that the witness who saw planes with his telescope was a child.

Interesting, that was not my impression but I am not sure if I ever saw his age explicitly stated. If handy, could you drop the source for that?

 

[Charlie Wiser]

Interesting, that was not my impression but I am not sure if I ever saw his age explicitly stated. If handy, could you drop the source for that?

Okay, turns out he was 21 so not exactly a kid. In the SUNlite article he's referred to as "young Mitch" and being out in the backyard with his mother, but the Ortega article from 1997 gives his age.

He saw "lights coming from the north" but there's no indication they were in V-formation, so there's nothing really linking them to the Phoenix Lights. He thought they were light planes, not jets:

What looked like individual lights to the naked eye actually split into two under the resolving power of the telescope. The lights were located on the undersides of squarish wings, Mitch says. And the planes themselves seemed small, like light private planes.
Stanley watched them for about a minute, and then turned away. It was the last thing the amateur astronomer wanted to look at.

Unlike other witnesses who made reports, he thought nothing of it, but his mother told someone about it the next day after hearing talk of ET craft on the radio.

So - who knows what he saw, but his testimony doesn't strike me as good quality as far as eyewitness account go.

 

[JMartJr]

but his testimony doesn't strike me as good quality as far as eyewitness account go.

We may have to respectfully disagree there. As far as eyewitness testimony goes, his seems as good as any (in my view, that is not very good, as I have mentioned frequently in the past I put little value in unsupported eyewitness testimony) but the added value he brings to the table is that he got a closer look at the formation of lights that he saw, having a telescope to hand. And saw planes.

It is certainly possible that he saw a different formation of lights than everybody else -- but then, if that is the case, we have YET ANOTHER formation of lights visible in Phoenix that night it must be possible that slme other witnesses saw different formations of lights, as there would be at least two sets of lights (Young Mitch's, and the one(s) Young Mitch didn't see) at around the same time. Given that Operation Snowbird was ongoing this is certainly not impossible.

But that opens up the can of worms that perhaps there was NO single event for the first part of the Phoenix Lights evening, and multiple witnesses saw multiple flights/objects. In which case there would be no single "UFO" at all to be explained. And no need for a single gigantic hoax device. (Given my admittedly imperfect understanding of the timeline during the first "event," the V shaped formation of lights, I have no opinion yet on the likelihood of multiple different flights or other stimuli being conflated into one prolonged multi-witness sighting. That possibility had not occurred to me until reading your post. But if Young Mitch saw something that was not what everybody else saw, it must be possible that some folks also saw whatever Young Mitch saw. If that turns out to be the case there was not a unified phenomenon during the early part of the evening to be identified.)

Unlike other witnesses who made reports, he thought nothing of it, but his mother told someone about it the next day after hearing talk of ET craft on the radio.

Which makes sense, there would be no reason for Young Mitch to make a report of having seen some planes until the context of what went on that evening was available to him.


(Determined repetition of "Young Mitch" to avoid potential confusion, as there is already a "Mitch" who is frequently mentioned in posts here! ^_^)

 

[Ann K]

Speculation, I'm afraid:
It's long been said that the people who tell a tall tale eventually begin to believe it themselves. I think that must also be true of people who never tell the tale except in their own minds, to themselves: "I wish I had said that" becomes "I told him that". Which makes me wonder, is a "deathbed confession" to be trusted? It seems unlikely that a person's mind would become clearer in the physical deterioration of his last days, so perhaps Walton's story was only what he thought to be true, instead of either the truth or a deliberately concocted tale.

 

[Mendel]

Speculation, I'm afraid:
It's long been said that the people who tell a tall tale eventually begin to believe it themselves. I think that must also be true of people who never tell the tale except in their own minds, to themselves: "I wish I had said that" becomes "I told him that". Which makes me wonder, is a "deathbed confession" to be trusted? It seems unlikely that a person's mind would become clearer in the physical deterioration of his last days, so perhaps Walton's story was only what he thought to be true, instead of either the truth or a deliberately concocted tale.

If we're speculating about motives, and I'd have to write a story about it, I'd portray Walton as someone who had successfully perpetrated a hoax, and who believed the Phoenix lights to be another hoax perpetrated by someone else. (This is borne out by the available evidence.) His big regret in life may have been that his hoax theory was never taken seriously, possibly because he couldn't say, "I'm a hoaxer myself, I know how these things work". So he might have used his 'deathbed confession' to try and get people to investigate the Phoenix Lights hoax theory in earnest; he'd be "proving" it was hoax by confessing to it, and get us to figure out how it was done. My story would then introduce the intrepid underdog investigator, whose investigation into the hoax leads her to the real perpetrator in the end, who is likewise on his deathbed and confesses to her.