Although I realise that "the sums not adding up" isn't important to you (as evidenced by your total lack of them on your theory), they are one of the ways in which we can try to determine the information given against what is possible. That's why your theory doesn't work. Because when you do the sums, it's not possible. And your assertions without showing us the numbers, the calculations and how you worked them out are simply baseless.
there were thoughts about other aircraft besides a wing or a B-52. Quote:
- "My first thought is that it was a large airplane, possibly a C-124"
And the quote continues;
"But after looking more closely, it seemed to look like a large object without wings" (Ware)
I've looked up the specifications for the C-124 and similar planes and can't find any mention of the version they made without wings.
- "The object appeared as a thin black line, giving a first impression of a B-36 type airplane heading straight toward us and silhouetted against a bright background.
"Heading straight towards us", that means that Johnson would see it crossing his field of view from right to left. And yet he mentions no such thing. Coleman also goes on to say "The object appeared not to move while we progressed with our tests"
I've looked up the specifications of the B-36 and similar planes and can't find any mention of their capability to hover motionless in the sky for even a few seconds, let alone the 10 minutes Coleman reports it being motionless.
- "Our attention was drawn to what looked like a large airplane off to our right ( north - west ).
This is Ware again, who then decided the object didn't have wings.
All the witnesses rejected the cloud theory in favor a large airplane
No they didn't.
Johnson concluded: flying saucer.
Ware concluded: large wingless object
Coleman concluded: "the blackness made it impossible to discern anything but the basic outline"
Wimmer concluded: A large object, some distance away.
Thoren concludes: It was "not exactly an illusion" but does at least hint at agreeing with Johnson's flying saucer conclusion.
... over a base with a runway ... in a region with several other airports including military contractors ... that developed airplanes like the one described
Not according to the math calculations of angular size at distance, speed and time to cover distances whilst watching the object "motionless" in the sky.
... but no, you think experienced airmen who studied it firsthand for several minutes were all fooled by a cloud illusion that wouldn't even fool anyone here ... or would it?
Like I already said: The thing about being fooled is that until you find out you've been fooled, there is no way of knowing when or how often you've been fooled.
Like I've said before I've seen dozens and dozens of lenticular clouds ... not once did I mistake them for an aircraft, even for a moment.
But how do you know that you haven't casually looked in the sky and seen what you
thought was an aircraft that was really a distant lenticular cloud?
The answer is; you don't BTW, regardless of how much you protest and continue to make such silly statements.
I've no idea either.
I know I've seen one lenticular cloud and when I saw it, I immediately recognised it as such. If I've ever been fooled into thinking that a lenticular cloud was a plane, I've no idea, because being fooled leaves you... well... fooled. And only a real fool will assert that he can't be fooled... because in making that statement, he's fooling himself for a start.
I've provided pictures of aircraft that existed and either looked exactly like or close enough to what was described to account for it.
But they don't. We have to make so many unfounded assumptions and ignore the physical impossibility that the numerical calculations show in order to get anywhere near it being an aircraft and that's before we even start with the justificational add ons of smoke trails, banking left, sooper sekrit spy planes and full throttle turns.
Show me a picture of a cloud that looks like a perfect flying wing.
Show me a video of one of these planes hovering motionless for five minutes. What the witnesses described didn't look like a "perfect flying wing" by the way... nor did it act like one.
BTW: I'm not saying it was a cloud, I haven't prematurely finished my research and calculations yet. And even when I do, I probably won't say it
was a cloud.
All that being said ... I don't deny a cloud could conceivably account for it anyway. But then again I'm not committed to any one answer ... just the best one.
You haven't done nearly enough research or calculations to know what the
best answer may be, and you're hardly likely to either. It's not alien, you're not bothered about identifying it (even though 'alien' means 'unknown' in your world).
That means... OMG... Aliens1!!!