Unidentified German Flying Machines over Sweden, 1944/1945

Discussions on all (non-biographical) aspects of the Luftwaffe air units and general discussions on the Luftwaffe.
ohrdruf
Member
Posts: 862
Joined: 15 May 2004 22:02
Location: south america

Post by ohrdruf » 10 Nov 2004 18:27

Juha

Throughout the Second World War, but particularly towards its close, Germany led the world in aeronautics by many years. US official reports say so. The flying machines complained of over Swedish airspace flew at enormous altitude and were faster than the fastest known aircraft.

The Allied powers were always anxious not to commit breaches of neutrality law (unless they were certain not to be found out). Having regard to the fact that these aircraft appear to have originated from German occupied Norway, the probability is that they were German.

It is established history, at least from US National archives, that in the last few months of the war, Germany had fast but sub-sonic flying machines which "appeared and disappeared apparently at will". No other nation had any such thing.

User avatar
Juha Tompuri
Forum Staff
Posts: 11418
Joined: 11 Sep 2002 20:02
Location: Mylsä

Post by Juha Tompuri » 10 Nov 2004 20:44

ohrdruf wrote:14.10.1944 The Times (UK) and Sydsvenska Dagbladet (Swe)
ROBOT AIRCRAFT OVER SWEDEN
A foreign robot aircraft - probably a flying bomb - crossed over Sweden this afternoon. The aircraft passed at great velocity from West to East coast continuing its flight over the sea heading East to North East. The aircraft moved at a very high altitude and could not be observed with the naked eye...
-who made the observations? (apparently the observations were made with naked eye)


ohrdruf wrote:...But the smoke or gases ejected formed a white trail over 200 metres long and could be clearly seen.
-If not knowing distance (altitude], it's very difficult to estimate lenghts ( condensation trail) there.
ohrdruf wrote:The engine made a noise similar to that of a four-engined bomber. "Speed was considerable and even exceeded velocity of the newest fighter aircraft" the report said.
as above

PPoS wrote:I don't understand where else they would come from. Norway? Not very likely. Denmark? Nope. Finland. Would surprise me.

If they came from the west it could possibly only be germans hiding somewhere around (or in) Norway OR ... United Kingdom. But I have not heard that the britts used rockets during WW2 .. I do know that the british used jetplanes in the end of 1945 .. But so did the germans aswell, even before 1945

If the rockets came from the east, it would surely be the Soviet Union .. But now they came from the west.. So, hiding germans or the redcoats?
Do they have to be rockets?
I would bet my money on the redcoats.
ohrdruf wrote: The flying machines complained of over Swedish airspace flew at enormous altitude and were faster than the fastest known aircraft.
Known to who?
Enormous altitude ? Is there any mentions how many meters?


ohrdruf wrote:The Allied powers were always anxious not to commit breaches of neutrality law (unless they were certain not to be found out). Having regard to the fact that these aircraft appear to have originated from German occupied Norway, the probability is that they were German.
Is it a fact that the aircraft came to Sweden from Norway?

Regards, Juha

User avatar
PPoS
Member
Posts: 848
Joined: 22 Sep 2004 12:35
Location: Sweden

Post by PPoS » 10 Nov 2004 21:57

Juha

It's not impossible that it could be the british. But I'd like to know what type of rockets the british had during WW2, I've only seen a small SAM at the end of the war. No ballistic missiles..

I'm not really sure that they were missiles or flying bombs, but it seems more likely than a plane. The only british jetplane I'am aware of during WW2 is Gloster G.41 Meteor F Mk. I which had a top speed of 410 mph (660 kmp). It also had a ceiling of 44,000 ft (13,410 m). And Norway and Denmark didn't have jetplanes until the end of the 1950's.

But I don't understand why the british airforce would fly jetplanes over Sweden? And I don't understand why they would fly rockets over Sweden either. Surely it had the range of flying over Sweden from coast to coast, but it wouldn't be able to return back to UK after that, mainly because the lack of fuel. And it seems like these "crafts" seen over Sweden just dissapered.

As far as I know the britts didn't have bases in Finland, Soviet Union or in the Baltic countries (Estonia and so on)?

So where did they refuel?

User avatar
Juha Tompuri
Forum Staff
Posts: 11418
Joined: 11 Sep 2002 20:02
Location: Mylsä

Post by Juha Tompuri » 10 Nov 2004 22:00

PPoS,

Did they have to be jet-planes?

Regards, Juha

User avatar
stril
Member
Posts: 2590
Joined: 10 Jul 2003 10:37
Location: Norway

Post by stril » 10 Nov 2004 23:00

Hello
There is a difference that often comes forward when reading about the research some people do.
Most(not all) that are having a higher degree/education in history usually present a conclusion after they are done, right or wrong, its their conclusion. Amataurs(not all) usually spendt their time chasing shadows, spending time following up every bit of information they think can be useful.In most cases they end up with nothing. You see the difference if you put a pile of papers in front of a serious researcher or a amataur, the first go straight to the point, the other reading all that they find interesting, at the arrival interesting in knowing more about "engines", but leaving with their head filled with info about "nuts".
Of course, lots of discoveries have been and would be made by dedicated amataurs.
Reson for me mention this is the recent treads about UFO´s in the air and the sea.What im interesting in is a conclusion in the matters, its to exiting for me to read all the if,how,why and what.
For me it seems like the writers have lots of knowledge on the subject, so i hope that i dont offend anyone by asking..Can i have the finalt result ?, and your conclusion on this matter..?
regards
stril

ohrdruf
Member
Posts: 862
Joined: 15 May 2004 22:02
Location: south america

Post by ohrdruf » 11 Nov 2004 04:32

Stril

QUESTION

Did Hitler's Germany, which lead the world by decades in aeronautics at that time, operate some kind of advanced flying machine which still remains on the secret list of former Allied nations 60 years after the event.

OPINION

The former Allies will NEVER, unless forced, release information pertaining to German wartime developments which they can neither explain nor emulate.


In 1968 at the instigation of the USAF, the University of Colorado launched an investigation into the UFO phenomenon. Dr Edward U Condon, Scientific Director, was in charge, and the Condon Report was the result. It was a very long publication which offered virtually nothing of interest which was not already known, mainly because so few official documents about UFOs had been released into the public domain by the United States authorities.

The Condon Report was a colossal waste of time and money except for Appendix "R" which purported to be a USAF document based on certain sightings of strange aircraft. This document had been doctored to include a phrase that "the USAF believed the machines sighted to be an interplanetary craft of some kind."


In order to denounce the forgery, the US authorities were now forced against their will to release the original document.


The true USAF document stated that the sightings referred to were believed to be aircraft of a German design similar to the Horten Parabola glider in hull form. The speed of the aircraft was very fast, but sub-sonic at all times. Its engines made a deep growling sound. They left a brownish vapour trail which persisted for about an hour, and a sample of this vapour had been taken and tested. The USAF was most anxious to establish more information about this aircraft, because it did something of which no other manned machine was capable - it had the ability to appear and disappear apparently at will, and vanished into thin air if approached.


This document is from the official US archive and as a primary document IS HISTORY. In my opinion the aircraft over Sweden were versions of the aircraft mentioned in the USAF report.

Ohrdruf

varjag
Financial supporter
Posts: 4431
Joined: 01 May 2002 01:44
Location: Australia

Post by varjag » 11 Nov 2004 11:26

Thank you Ohrdruf - for this illuminating summary and conclusion.

I'll drink to that!....oh, and to history - Varjag

Gespenst
Member
Posts: 298
Joined: 21 May 2003 23:38
Location: Finland

Post by Gespenst » 11 Nov 2004 15:24

ohrdruf wrote:The Condon Report was a colossal waste of time and money except for Appendix "R" which purported to be a USAF document based on certain sightings of strange aircraft. This document had been doctored to include a phrase that "the USAF believed the machines sighted to be an interplanetary craft of some kind."


Appendix R:

http://ncas.sawco.com/condon/text/appndx-r.htm

Where?

ohrdruf
Member
Posts: 862
Joined: 15 May 2004 22:02
Location: south america

Post by ohrdruf » 11 Nov 2004 17:47

Gespenst

This is not the full original text of the falsified document. After all, if you were the University of Colorado and had been duped by a forgery, would you wish your shame to be immortalized on the Internet?

The full, true declassified document is at:

http://project1947.com/fig/schulgen.htm

User avatar
Alter Mann
Member
Posts: 686
Joined: 11 Jan 2003 04:50
Location: Texas County, Missouri

Swedish Overflights

Post by Alter Mann » 11 Nov 2004 19:46

First I have a problem with the definition of history used by some contributors. Documentation of an event does not make it history. The documentation was presumably written by someone, maybe even approved by someone else. The fact of documentation does not indicate that either the writer or approver observed the event, or even knew the people that did.

History is what actually happened during the event. A small event that can be easily observed in its entirety can be easily documented by a trained observer, if the observer does not often make spelling or grammer errors. A large (wide spread) event, with several different observers is never going to produce anything more than a synthesis of various parts of the event, certainly not exactly what happened during the entire event or series of events.

History also seems to me to be a function of the interests of the individual. If you ask a Vietnamese farmer who won WWII, he would probably say, "Vietnam". If you ask him who lost, I doubt that he would mention Germany. This is actually a matter of semantics, or the meaning of different means of communication to different individuals.

However, saying that something is history because it was written down by someone seems to me to leave a few loopholes because of the validity of the writer's interpretation of the event.

As to the origin of the 'not yet identified flying objects' (NYIFOs), I haven't seen any evidence in this thread of some of the first things that came to my mind.

For instance, if a large aircraft was to fly from Iceland to the nearest airbase in Russia, where would it cross Sweden? (I really don't know. I'm not being facetious.)

How about if a large, long-range, multi-engined aircraft left Russia on a reconnaisance or test mission into the Arctic region above Iceland. Where would it cross Sweden on its return flight?

Suppose that a large aircraft, flying relatively slowly, not leaving contrails, decided to de-ice its wings over Sweden and dumped a relatively large quantity of ice. I would suspect that the ice would produce some interesting visual effects, be very hard for an aircraft to intercept, and not leave much evidence on the ground.

Suppose that the Russians had captured (hired) some German engineers who had worked on the V-4 project and possibly some nearly completed models. (It seems likely to me that they did this.) Suppose that the NYIFOs were actually V-4s under testing, especially as Naval SSMs. How about a V-2 even? Russia might well want to have the missile land in Russia, hopefully in an un-populated area, in order to assess its accuracy from a long range launcher. If you say that the V-2 didn't have the range, my response is, "Wasn't the V-2 still under development in May of 1945?"

Finally, in all disputed matters, Occam's Razor has to be the final solution. "Discard all possibilities that can be proven to be false and what is left is the truth." Unfortunately, Occam lived in a much simpler time.

User avatar
PPoS
Member
Posts: 848
Joined: 22 Sep 2004 12:35
Location: Sweden

Post by PPoS » 11 Nov 2004 21:14

Juha
No of course not, but I would like to know of any prop plane flying really really fast during 1944-1945. If you look at an jetplane flying very high (which I can see pretty often, because it's a military airfield pretty close to where I live) you can see differense in the speed of that plane and a propeller plane.

Alte Mann
I don't belive that a russian plane would fly over Sweden at all, especially not on a mission over the Artic (what a detour, huh?) ;) AND Sweden is a NEUTRAL country, which it was during the 1944-1945 .. Atleast partially neutral. I don't think the russians would care so much about it, but it seems more proper for a military pilot to know where to fly. And if they would fly over Sweden, they would not very likely fly over the south of Sweden (where during 1944-1945 almost the whole Swedish Airforce was based).

ohrdruf
Member
Posts: 862
Joined: 15 May 2004 22:02
Location: south america

Post by ohrdruf » 11 Nov 2004 22:25

Alte(r) Mann

Grammar is spelled "grammar" and not "grammer".

History is based on primary documents. A primary document is one whose authenticity is guaranteed by the State which emits it. The 1947 Schulgen document is one such document.

No statement has been made herein to the effect that the 1944/45 reports are history, since they emanated from various national newspapers in the UK, USA and Sweden. The reports were introduced to this thread for discussion.

Your contribution has some novel ideas.

User avatar
PPoS
Member
Posts: 848
Joined: 22 Sep 2004 12:35
Location: Sweden

Post by PPoS » 11 Nov 2004 22:36

Please everyone ...

HISTORY IS WHAT HAPPEND FOR 100 YEARS AGO, 10 YEARS AGO, 1 YEAR AGO, 1 MONTH AGO, 1 HOUR AGO, 1 MINUTE AGO AND 1 SECOND AGO ! ! ! ! ! !

Just get it :P

User avatar
Alter Mann
Member
Posts: 686
Joined: 11 Jan 2003 04:50
Location: Texas County, Missouri

UFOs Over Sweden, 1944-46

Post by Alter Mann » 11 Nov 2004 22:57

Ohrdruf, I'm sorry but my spell checker isn't working. :(

As to my posting name, I have been trying to get input for a long time. My original concept was that I would steal the nickname that the German soldiers used for the meat ration that often had the initials AM on them. No particular reason except that real aficianados (sp?) might recognize the reference. What was the name that the German soldiers did use? Was it Alter Mann instead of Alte Mann?

Speaking of history, I don't want to push you guys too far, but, in my experience, most official documents are falsified in one way or another, for one reason or another. It is true that history is composed of events that have already happened, no matter what the time interval is, but written or documented 'history', IMHO, may not have any relation to what actually happened. What actually happened is the real history, although there may not have been any interested or competent observers on the spot.

I hope that my thoughts may have been of interest to someone. I'm not trying to just stir the smelly brown stuff. I think that sometimes people start down paths of thought that may disclude some more realistic alternatives.

ohrdruf
Member
Posts: 862
Joined: 15 May 2004 22:02
Location: south america

Post by ohrdruf » 12 Nov 2004 00:02

AM

I have no idea how the Swedish national archives function, but the lack of information from their archive sources on the incidents recounted might suggest that the subject matter is still classified. Why the Swedes would want to do that may be related to the 1946 UFO sightings over Sweden which are well documented by NARA. This would indicate that the groups of sightings are linked, and explain the secrecy.

Juha suggested the other day FW 200s. Your Russian aircraft theory is better but alas in my opinion must also join the "less likely" category.

I made the point in an earlier post to my friend Varjag that history is bunk simply because it is based on a SELECTION of primary documents, and not on all the documents, the most sensitive of which may be being withheld for a century, or for ever. That is precisely why we should not discount secondary sources, such as newspapers of the time, books by eye-witnesses and so forth, because such sources hint at possibilities that the academic, accepted history is falsified or inaccurate.

I would reject your assertion that most official documents are falsified. I can think of two examples from the US national archive which might be condemned as such, but the practice must be very rare.

What is more likely, and here again I can cite a couple of cases, is that the national archive withholds the documents for an extended period of years while an esteemed author publishes a book which contains a falsified history approved by the State(s) concerned. A personality who did this was Gen Leslie Groves, Head of the Manhattan Project, in his book "Now It Can Be Told". Groves even said that when the documents he was quoting were released, they would be found to confirm precisely what he was saying. When the documents were finally released in 1995, it was discovered, on the contrary, that he was a bare-faced liar.


The 1947 Schulgen paper needs to be looked at very closely. There is a pattern emerging: 1944-1945-1946-1947, all involving flying machines with many reported features in common. You may comfort yourself at night with your belief that most official documents are falsified. It is a trait peculiar to Americans, based I suspect on the very rational fear that their role on the world stage is a precarious one.


The USAF stated that the 1947 flying machines reported upon appeared to them man-made. Their stated worry was that they were Russian based on German designs, but behind that assertion was the true concern that the machines were German pure and simple. If the machines could appear and disappear at will, and dematerialise when approached by US interceptors, the question is: Where did they dematerialise to? Was the place to where they dematerialized a place on the reverse side of the mirror, so to speak, that place of safety to which Doenitz alluded, and which was reached by passing through thin air?


What use can be made of non-combat warplanes? Once the possibility is perceived, once the plan is understood, we will have identified the long term intention, and know that probably we have not seen the last of National Socialism, and that, at the appropriate time, it will return for the final Endsieg.

Return to “Luftwaffe air units and Luftwaffe in general”