UFO in Russia: Real or Hoax?

[Spartan198]

Pictures of a UFO crash site in Russia (sorry, can't find any better quality pics).







What do you guys think? Real or fake?

[CountArach]

Small pic is small...

Personally, I think it is a commie plot...

[LeftEyeNine]

These photos are from the Tunguska Event of 1908.

[Fragony]

It's more fun if it's real so I go with real

[Gaius Scribonius Curio]

A Flying Saucer?

...so cliched!

[Ramses II CP]

Looks like a bunch of packed snow to me. The idea of a 'UFO' is a little absurd anyway.

[LittleGrizzly]

Definetly not a UFO, possibly a UO though...

[Gregoshi]

Looking at the size of the ship, the aliens must be on the small side...I think we could take 'em.

[Monk]

Looking at the size of the ship, the aliens must be on the small side...I think we could take 'em.

Such a man, i'd follow him to hell and back I would!

Looks pretty fake though. The area around the object is near pristine, you'd think if something crashed in the manor it indicates by its angle it would have completely tore the ground up around it as it hit/skid/tumbled.

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

Well, to me it seems as if it should be reclassified, perhaps to a UFFO - Unidentified Formerly Flying Object.

[rajpoot]

Looks like a scene out of some old low budget movie.
Btw, I do believe that we are not the only ones, there is someone else out there somewhere.

[Viking]

Fake..

[Gregoshi]

Well, it's not much, but here's a little more on those pictures, supposedly from the KGB: Pravda article

[Gregoshi]

Alrighty, here is a 3 minute clip of that alleged KGB film: clip

[Viking]

The pravda article relies heavily upon the article on the Alien website, which is a website full of bollox (surprise, surprise ).

[Monk]

I dunno, those sites really don't talk much about how a crashed UFO seems to have taken zero visible damage, as well as completely embedding itself in the ground without ripping up the terrain at all. The actors (because that's how they come across) in that clip march in an almost parade like formation for just a few feet. Now maybe It's just because i've never served or am not russian, but that seemed a bit much and cried "Hoax" for me.

[Veho Nex]

Boulder?

[Caius]

It does it say in one of those pictures: Made In Japan.

[Ironside]

I dunno, those sites really don't talk much about how a crashed UFO seems to have taken zero visible damage, as well as completely embedding itself in the ground without ripping up the terrain at all. The actors (because that's how they come across) in that clip march in an almost parade like formation for just a few feet. Now maybe It's just because i've never served or am not russian, but that seemed a bit much and cried "Hoax" for me.

While it certainly screems hoax, that UFO could be quite old.

It's basically impossible for it to be recently crashed though, the trees that would be cut according to the crash angle is intact. It would need to land (not crash) straight down and then dig itself into the ground afterwards to fit the "crash" site if recent.

But considering that the KGB operative talk about debris I would say that an old spacecraft is also inconsistant and thus it's a hoax.

[Husar]

The metal on that "UFO" looks a lot like the metal on many russian aircraft to me. Not like that means a lot, but the "UFO" looks like "Made in Russia" to me. Considering they say it was bought on the black market from filmmakers....

[Marshal Murat]

It's also interesting that they only show one side of the 'UFO'. The thing looks like it was made of a couple sheets over a wood frame. In such a pristine place too....

[Moros]

definately a hoax. If you look at the angle the 'UFO' crash, it would have collided with the trees behind. As those are intact, except for a tree or two (at a wrong side). Thus a sane man can only conclude that it is not a real UFO or anything else that fell down from the sky.

[Reverend Joe]

If it had hit the ground at that angle it would have exploded, miracle alien metal or no.

Fake.

[Devastatin Dave]

Looks like Godzilla dropped his Viagra.

[Csargo]

[Adrian II]

Let's be fair. Let's assume this is not a fake.

At least the uniforms, army jeeps, sun glasses and related accoutrements all look authentic. So is the quality of the footage; it looks like genuine 9 mm. The film is highly amateuristic though. An army cameraman would never move so haphazardly, shoot straight into the sun, or fail to slowly and completely circle and capture an object of potential military importance.

On the other hand, by 1969 the Soviets were very busy developing their first AEW (AWACS) plane, the TU-126 Moss, and the 6-7 yards diameter disc in the film (with remnants of a broken-off strut?) could be the rotordome of an experimental model. That would also explain the apparent secrecy surounding the film and the incident.

My 2 cts.

EDIT

Wait a minute. Let me add 2 more cents. It seems that all the soldiers are wearing officer belts (without shiny buckle) and not regular soldiers' belts (with a square, shiny buckle). This indicates that the footage is a hoax. But then there was a change in Soviet uniform styles precisely in 1969, so who knows...

2nd EDIT

Some time ago we had a discussion of the UFO phenomenen in the Backroom. I seem to recall that quite a few members took them seriously. Why is it that, when a concrete UFO sighting comes up, none of them ventures a hypothesis and skeptic old me is about the only one who takes the trouble to analyse the thing at all? Funny, that.

[Moros]

If it had hit the ground at that angle it would have exploded, miracle alien metal or no.

Fake.

shattered perhaps, but it would only explode if it contained an amount of flammable substance.

[Redleg]

Let's be fair. Let's assume this is not a fake.

At least the uniforms, army jeeps, sun glasses and related accoutrements all look authentic. So is the quality of the footage; it looks like genuine 9 mm. The film is highly amateuristic though. An army cameraman would never move so haphazardly, shoot straight into the sun, or fail to slowly and completely circle and capture an object of potential military importance.

What concerns me is that any average military intelligence film that would have had the classification this web site claims the film had would of indeed had a full circle film capture of the site. In 1969 the Soviet Union was not lax in its gathering of intelligence information. The very lack of the full circle capture in this film screams that it is a hoax to me.

On the other hand, by 1969 the Soviets were very busy developing their first AEW (AWACS) plane, the TU-126 Moss, and the 6-7 yards diameter disc in the film (with remnants of a broken-off strut?) could be the rotordome of an experimental model. That would also explain the apparent secrecy surounding the film and the incident.

Even then the soviets would of made a full circle film capture of the crash site to document that they cleaned up everything.

Wait a minute. Let me add 2 more cents. It seems that all the soldiers are wearing officer belts (without shiny buckle) and not regular soldiers' belts (with a square, shiny buckle). This indicates that the footage is a hoax. But then there was a change in Soviet uniform styles precisely in 1969, so who knows...

Getting warm on that uniforms Adrain. What is even more important is the vehicles shown in the film. The poor angles and focus on the vehicles seems makes it hard for me to determine if the vehicles are of 1969 soviet military or not. The paint however seems to me to be a shade to bright of a green.

The lack of sound in the video is interesting - it could be just my system refusing to have sound because of a filter on the computer.

All in all - I would say this is a hoax given the lack of followup information - just as the link also indicates

[Adrian II]

The lack of sound in the video is interesting - it could be just my system refusing to have sound because of a filter on the computer.

There was no sound tape with the footage.

I've looked into this some more and it appears the footage was first presented in 1998 as part of a TNT documentary (hosted by Roger Moore) which is available on YouTube under the title "Russian Roswell crashed ufo & alien recovered". Apart from the mentioned 'crash site footage', the documentary contained extensive footage of a purported military autopsy on a humanoid 'body' recovered from this disc. The autopsy footage has sound, it appears genuine, but then comes the snag. The three medical personnel carrying out the autopsy reportedly all died the next day from cerebral hemorrhage. Their death certificates are shown on camera. The certificates are dated 1969 alright, but the heading reads 'Russian Federation' instead of 'Union of Socialist Soviet Republics'. The Russian Federation was established only in 1991...

Certified hoax.

It is a pretty sophisticated hoax as well, which should be a warning to everyone who feels that UFO reports should be taken seriously. So they should, but they should also be approached with extreme caution. This example demonstrates that people will go to great lengths to create and support hoaxes.

P.S. Thanks for you input, mate.