Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

UFO's in Israel

Expand Messages
  • Jeroen Kumeling
    Israeli Mid-Air UFO Explosion Analyzed - It s The Real Thing by Barry Chamish 1-20-99 Last month I reported that I had acquired a
    Message 1 of 1 , Jan 21, 1999
      Israeli Mid-Air UFO Explosion Analyzed - It's The Real Thing
      by Barry Chamish


      Last month I reported that I had acquired a video copy of a
      mid-air UFO explosion over the Israeli city of Rosh Haayin. I
      wrote that my impression was the video captured a profoundly
      important moment: the first mid-air UFO collision ever recorded.
      I requested that experts analyze the film scientifically. Within
      a day, Dwight Connelly of MUFON committed himself to having the
      video analyzed. The video is a compilation of two UFO events
      recorded by Spasso Maximovitch in 1995 and 1996. I sent Dwight
      both clips and he passed them on to MUFON's video expert Jeff
      Sanio for computer analysis. The following is his report. I will
      not comment on his conclusions. Jeff has no need of my analysis
      of his analysis. Let's just sum matters up like this: It's The
      Real Thing. Added to Israel's list of UFO firsts, is the first
      mid-air explosion between two unexplained aerial craft ever
      captured on videotape or any other media. Several film and TV
      producers asked me to release the clip for their programs but I
      had to turn them down. I am prevented by a copyright problem
      from reproducing the film, though I am permitted to display my
      copy. I am seeking a conference to premiere this remarkable
      event. In the meantime, I will publish MUFON's full report on


      Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 23:39:44 -0800
      From: Jeff Sainio <jsainio@...
      Reply-To: jsainio@...
      To: chamish@...
      Subject: my report

      I left out the stills from the video, as you've already seen them.
      The paper copy has already been sent.

      Dwight Connelly
      14026 Ridgelawn
      Martinsville IL

      Rosh Haayin, central Israel
      Spasso Maximovitch

      Events as reported to me from Barry Chamish
      (chamish@...): `On 28/9/95, Spasso Maximovitch
      noticed an unexplainable object in the skies over Rosh Haayin in
      central Israel. He grabbed his video camera and captured a
      silvery, glowing object become, two, three and then four fiery
      orbs, in a near square formation, over a wide expanse of the
      northwestern sky. After this incident, Mr. Maximovitch became a
      constant skywatcher. His dilgence was rewarded on 24/6/96 when a
      similar silvery orb appeared in the lower western sky. He
      trained his video camera on the orb... And then a glowing white
      oval-shaped object appeared some 20 degrees west of the object
      and streaked toward it at high speed. Within three seconds it
      struck the stationary orb, causing a huge explosion in the sky
      which must have destroyed both objects. Stunned, Maximovitch
      stopped filming immediately after capturing the explosion.`

      The submitted video, which was in PAL format, was converted to
      NTSC format. It shows several events; a group of lights, one
      apparently dropped from another (the dropping is seen in the
      stills marked 28/9/1995 and 3:27:33); a stationary light which
      is apparently struck by a moving light, and a triangle of
      lights. The group of lights is interesting, but I could find no
      basis for investigating any form of anomalousness. The triangle
      of lights has no reference objects to indicate what or where it

      The stationary light was much more interesting. Various lights,
      probably streetlights, in the video were used as reference
      objects, and showed that the light was stationary over some 30
      seconds. An approaching airplane's landing lights will appear
      stationary, although motionlessness over this length of time
      seems unusual.

      A vertical tower structure, apparently made of girders, is near
      the light. Some horizontal structure is atop the structure. It
      was not sufficiently defined for continuous measurements to be
      made from it.

      Another bright object appears to the left and slightly below the
      stationary object. In 2.9 seconds, it moves toward the
      stationary object, apparently hitting and exploding. In 1/4
      second, the explosion disappears with no trace of either object.
      The 5-frame sequence to the right illustrates the sequence.

      The bright object can be seen to move between the girders of the
      vertical structure. This is useful in determining the relative
      size of the moving light. (The size of the light as seen on the
      video, is misleading; it is presumably much smaller than what is
      seen, due to extreme overexposure and glare.) The light
      disappears or reappears completely 6 times; in 3, the change is
      abrupt; completely bright-to-dark or vice versa. In the other 3,
      the change is gradual, with a frame showing partial brightness.
      What can be learned from this? One must remember that the video
      is a sequence of 1/50 second time exposures. Assume the light is
      small, and that the moving object has only one light. If by
      chance, the disappearance coincides with the period between
      exposures, an abrupt disappearance will be seen. A large light,
      or several lights horizontally separated, will never disappear
      abruptly while moving slowly. Since 6 occurrences form a useful
      population of samples, the moving light can reliably be said to
      be quite small. This probably eliminates the flame from a
      missile as a source.

      Although the vertical structure was not a reliable reference
      object, the two lights' relative position could be measured.
      Over 500 measurements of the two lights' position were made. The
      graph at right shows the distance between the 2 lights. Breaks
      in the data line are due to unreliable data from camera motion
      or the moving light going behind the girders. Reference straight
      lines show constant speed. The slopes of the lines show that the
      moving light spent about a second at some speed, then sped up
      about 16% before the collision. The 16% is not due to a zoom
      change; the tower is sufficiently visible to verify that its
      size does not appreciably change. Although the graph shows noise
      and missing data, the acceleration certainly occurred in under a
      second. No reasonable object I know of is capable of a 16%
      acceleration in a second.

      When the 2 objects apparently collide and explode, the apparent
      size of the light expands by a factor of roughly 2.5; this does
      not appear to be due to overexposure, but is the real size of
      the object. The last 2 frames of the video are NOT overexposed,
      but diffuse; since overexposure is not involved, this indicates
      the actual size of the explosion is shown. The real increase in
      size of the bright area is certainly much larger than 2.5. In
      the video the explosion moves downward; this is probably due to
      camera motion of the startled videographer; the reference tower
      is too smeared to verify this conclusion.

      The explosion is not due to any conventional method I am
      familiar with; conventional, large explosions require much more
      than 1/4 second to disappear, and usually generate flaming
      debris that falls from the explosion. Neither characteristic is
      seen here.

      The acceleration, light size, and explosion are not explainable
      in any convention way that I know of, and this case remains

      Jeff Sainio
      MUFON Staff Photoanalyst
      7206 W. Wabash
      Milwaukee WI 53223-2609
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.