Guest MAN OF THE WOODS Posted March 13, 2011 Share Posted March 13, 2011 I agree,you cant argue documented facts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BDK Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 I agree the fact that a AH-1 Cobra crashed in the forest and the pilot and gunner died, thats irrefutable. I don't agree with the facts in the BFRO they just don't add up right. Something may have happened, that I'll agree too. But I think the facts may have been changed a good deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MAN OF THE WOODS Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 Everyone knows by now how i feel about the bfro,most think they are water walkers! Here's the stats from a former bfro field researcher i know well. 92% of all info comes from people like us,trail pounders. 5% comes from there version of science. 3% field research.If go way back before people started worshiping the bfro.they were Reporting sightings from places that dont exist! At 3% there rambo suits dont get dirty! Come on people,think for yourself! Anyone can be a computer jockey! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bipedalist Posted March 14, 2011 BFF Patron Share Posted March 14, 2011 One thing I'd like to mention. Leigh Culver made the update BFRO post to add to the initial database/sighting report. It looks like he pulled together the crash site photographs and other references from a military standpoint. He is frequently on blogtalk radio and is supposed to have a return visit to one of them in the future. If you want to get to the bottom of it I would imagine a call-in to his second show would be in order. I believe the first segment was on nite-callers recently. He may or may not know additional information about whether pursuit of the MP witnesses was successful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest D B Cooper Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 (edited) I have a friend who is a retired Army M.P. Staff Sgt. I asked him about regulations concerning the number of rounds carried in a 1911 .45 magazine. His reply... "It depended on the unit. I was at some Posts where we were given 10 rounds, and it was expected that we would put 5 in each magazine. You were allowed to put the loaded magazine in the weapon. I usually put 7 in my magazine, and sometimes carried my own magazine, and had one in the chamber. I actually think most places allowed 5 rounds per magazine as standard, but 6 would not surprise me at all. I do not believe that Army regulations stipulated the number of rounds carried in the magazine, it was left to the Post Commander. Ed" Edited March 14, 2011 by D B Cooper Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 As a prior service Army MP (1st MP Co, 716th MP Bn, Ft Riley Ks 79'-81') there are a number of, I don't know,... discrepancies, in this incident that don't fit my experience as an MP. Nor my experiences as a LEO and private pilot. I won't waste bandwidth listing them all. For these reasons I doubt the story is true. Strongly... One final word on the 1911 45. I have used one or another from when I was an MP in 79' to this day when I carry a Kimber Custom Shop Ultra Raptor II in 45ACP. Probably owned/ was issued & used professionally a good baker's dozen 1911 45s and one Colt Combat Commander 1911 in 38 Super over the last 32 years. Absolutely love 1911s and there are few fireams and no other handgun I would rather have in my hand in close combat. I believe it can be stippulated I have a lot of experience with 1911s... Take this to the bank, sooner or later 1911s have stoppages, usually failure to feed. It can be caused by many things, but often by incorrect grip (too loose, the dreaded "Limp Wrist Grip" which prevents the weapon from functioning correctly). A good hand with a 1911 can clear this stoppage so fast someone seeing it might not even realize the shooter had a stoppage. If you have a 1911 that "never" has a stoppage, I recommend you "never" part ways with it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MAN OF THE WOODS Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 I agree if you the hand/wrist strength of a wet cracker,the .45 is not for you! That's why they went to the 9mm. Higher capacity"CLIPS"/mag.for people that cant hit a barn with a bat! The whole story is a dead dog.The bfro.couldnt find anyway to twist it so they gave up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
georgerm Posted March 17, 2011 Share Posted March 17, 2011 Aside from all the gun talk, and assuming the story is true which seems to be the case, why would BFs be dragging humans from the wreck other than for eating? If they were starving then a free meal seems to answer the question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bipedalist Posted March 17, 2011 BFF Patron Share Posted March 17, 2011 I would imagine the conglomeration of smells from the fire-ball of aviation fuel and smoldering would have brought anything in from some distance even if it wasn't in the immediate neighborhood. Not to mention the sound of impact. I doubt it was an attempted nocturnal BF rescue attempt let's put it that way. I still find the story among the wildest of almost any out there including the BF is my UFO pilot ones. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 22, 2011 Share Posted March 22, 2011 I have a few problems with this report. It states that the Helicopter crashed and burned. Given the remoteness of the area, they did have to walk in 1/4 mile, wouldn't this start the surrounding area on fire? This was a heavily wooded area with many trees and plants around as evidenced by the photos, yet no signs of fire or burning. With the area in the photos, that would have gone up and burned in a heartbeat given the fact that aviation fuel was obviously all over the area. Also, these are MP's and only one out of five guys have a flashlight? That is a common and almost mandatory piece of equipment for any LEO. He stated that everyone had pulled their side arm, but that the SGT had to drop his light to pull his weapon. Crash scene investigators are also not going to accept a shrug off when asking why the pilots body was moved. They are going to want to know who did it and why. Personally, too many inconsistencies for me to buy this one. That bothers me also. If the body was pulled out, there would have been some repercussions. No one messes with a death scene until the investigatory unit arrives when dealing with the military. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 22, 2011 Share Posted March 22, 2011 I would imagine the conglomeration of smells from the fire-ball of aviation fuel and smoldering would have brought anything in from some distance even if it wasn't in the immediate neighborhood. Not to mention the sound of impact. I doubt it was an attempted nocturnal BF rescue attempt let's put it that way. I still find the story among the wildest of almost any out there including the BF is my UFO pilot ones. Biped, Surly not! BF flies UFOs? Well, that's a new one for me. I'd just as soon never hear about something that crazy. Do you have to deal with crazies like that very often? My heart goes out to you..Hugs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
georgerm Posted March 6, 2012 Share Posted March 6, 2012 Do we really think this didn't happen because one witness claimed it never happened? What was his motivation to deny this incident? Was it a cover up? Can we find the others to ask? I can't believe an Army Ranger made up this story/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 Do we really think this didn't happen because one witness claimed it never happened? What was his motivation to deny this incident? Was it a cover up? Can we find the others to ask? I can't believe an Army Ranger made up this story/ Army rangers aren't all cut from the same cloth perhaps? There are all kinds of people out there. Perhaps Bfro didn't really verify this guy's identity? I know there are other men out there with the same name as me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BFSleuth Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 (edited) Has anyone else noticed that the title of the report now says that this report was debunked per "message from Patrick Caulkins"? Read the last part of the follow up report: "Message sent to BFRO from Patrick Caulkins on 9/3/2010: I was with B Co mp USAG at Ft. Mcpherson in 1985 and was on the mentioned crash security mission to Camp Merrill. Very little of the story I read on your page is based in reality. Vollunteers were asked to join the mission, it was not assigned. We flew to Camp Merrill in a Huey and were given a Ford cargo van and some MREs by the camp CO. When we arrived at the scene we parked within yards of the debris. Myself and a couple others(I do not remember the other soldiers names, but I don't regonize the ones mentioned in the article.)helped the ranger medic bag and carry the bodies to the ambulance. After receiving final instructions and everyone left we settled in for the night (no special guard shifts were set) nearly all of us stayed awake all night. The night was VERY quiet and we passed the time talking and eating MREs. Nothing was seen or heard all night and absolutely no weapons were discharged.The next morning we drove back to the main camp, returned the van and drove back to FT. Mac." I think this simply illustrates that reports in the BFRO database haven't always been vetted properly before publication. Some investigators do an excellent job. Some reports don't seem to have any vetting at all. In this case the BFRO openly requested additional information because of the nature of the report, and possibly because BFRO has a stance that BF isn't dangerous to or prey upon humans. The bottom line is that this story seems to have been an elaborate attempt to hoax the BFRO. Edited March 7, 2012 by BFSleuth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
georgerm Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 We simply don't know what happened at this time and the story is worth more investigation. Someone may be denying the story to protect the army status of soldiers still in the Army. If the commanding Ranger altered the report to protect his rank, then this could come back to bite him. I would like to see what others saw on the mission and contact the Army fellow who provided the original report. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts