New in the SHADO Library

I'd seen some of the text on Straker before and it made me laugh - Straker
'took it upon himself' to prove there was a threat when we saw on screen
that it was Henderson who was in the lead in convincing world leaders of the
threat. LOL At least they got the height right for an American astronaut of
the time.

 

  _____  

From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of
griffwason
Sent: Monday, June 13, 2011 4:35 AM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: [SHADO] Re: UFO Bloopers

 

 

Hi,

I am not sure if the following links will help with dates, and if you have
seen these before, please excuse me. They are screen captures from the UK
UFO DVD Set, and these particular ones are from DVD #2.

My guess is that the text was researched and written by Chris Bentley.
Whilst most of Chris' writing is always meticulously researched, much of the
text in these is just pure fiction (i.e. non UFO canon), and could have been
written by many people on this list.

Anyway, there are some 'facts', and dates mentioned:-

#1 - http://www.griffwason.com/UFO_CharacterProfile-01.jpg
#2 - http://www.griffwason.com/UFO_CharacterProfile-02.jpg
#3 - http://www.griffwason.com/UFO_CharacterProfile-04.jpg
#4 - http://www.griffwason.com/UFO_CharacterProfile-06.jpg
#5 - http://www.griffwason.com/UFO_CharacterProfile-08.jpg
#6 - http://www.griffwason.com/UFO_CharacterProfile-10.jpg
#7 - http://www.griffwason.com/UFO_CharacterProfile-11.jpg

Please make of it, what you will. Again, if you have seen these before,
please excuse me.

Regards, Griff





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Also, we see that Chris Bentley thinks Johnny was born in 1972, which puts
a QUESTION OF PRIORITIES in 1980.  As I said before, I think 1972 seems
reasonable from the point of view of Ed & Mary's marriage, but is not
reasonably considering all of the progress they had made with SHADO
HQ and their first batch of recruits.

Marc

On Mon, 13 Jun 2011 08:51 -0700, "D.A. Rorabaugh" <[hidden email]> wrote:
> I'd seen some of the text on Straker before and it made me laugh - Straker
> 'took it upon himself' to prove there was a threat when we saw on screen
> that it was Henderson who was in the lead in convincing world leaders of the
> threat. LOL At least they got the height right for an American astronaut of
> the time.

It really all goes back to the fact the Anderson and his writers weren't as
careful in logic and continuity for UFO as later writers for later series
were expected to be. I mean, how could they have possibly guessed that 40+
years later people would be arguing about details and trying to make it all
work logically.

Even Roddenberry - who was noted for his meticulousness - let things through
on STtos. He never imagined people would freeze frame Kirk's gravestone,
make out what was on it and then argue about what it meant when later
scripts and the films disagreed with it.

Fan writers can do their best to come up with explanations, but no matter
what, there are things that just don't work without a lot of creative
finessing. (Like Ford saying he'd been 'with them' for 2 years when we also
know he was one of the first recruits. You can skew the timeline to make
both statements true, but then that makes for unreasonable issues with
Straker's marriage and the visual cues given in AQoP don't support more than
a few years between the wedding and Johnny's birth.)

One can argue until they're blue in the face that one solution or another is
the best explanation, but frankly, some of these things just don't hang
together rationally and no amount of finessing is going to make it ALL work
together and have it work with the world as the rest of us know it.

As a writer, I choose which discrepancies I'm going work to make fit
together and which ones I'm going to ignore or minimize. And frankly, (IMHO)
if you can't come up with more than solution for a problem, you're not
really trying. *grin*

 

  _____  

From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Marc
Martin
Sent: Monday, June 13, 2011 9:54 AM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: RE: [SHADO] Re: UFO Bloopers

 

 

Also, we see that Chris Bentley thinks Johnny was born in 1972, which puts
a QUESTION OF PRIORITIES in 1980. As I said before, I think 1972 seems
reasonable from the point of view of Ed & Mary's marriage, but is not
reasonably considering all of the progress they had made with SHADO
HQ and their first batch of recruits.

Marc

On Mon, 13 Jun 2011 08:51 -0700, "D.A. Rorabaugh" <[hidden email]
<mailto:momkat%40dandello.net> > wrote:
> I'd seen some of the text on Straker before and it made me laugh - Straker
> 'took it upon himself' to prove there was a threat when we saw on screen
> that it was Henderson who was in the lead in convincing world leaders of
the
> threat. LOL At least they got the height right for an American astronaut
of
> the time.





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

i have a possible solution,
since cannon reveals that shado was infiltrated many times, they were talking in code, for security reasons giving wrong dates and cover names for events. this is not only common for military and investigative agencies to do, but in the public sector it is done also to prevent confabulation on the part of witnesses and for absolute security.
jim

--- On Mon, 6/13/11, D.A. Rorabaugh <[hidden email]> wrote:


From: D.A. Rorabaugh <[hidden email]>
Subject: RE: [SHADO] Re: UFO Bloopers
To: [hidden email]
Date: Monday, June 13, 2011, 11:02 AM


 



It really all goes back to the fact the Anderson and his writers weren't as
careful in logic and continuity for UFO as later writers for later series
were expected to be. I mean, how could they have possibly guessed that 40+
years later people would be arguing about details and trying to make it all
work logically.

Even Roddenberry - who was noted for his meticulousness - let things through
on STtos. He never imagined people would freeze frame Kirk's gravestone,
make out what was on it and then argue about what it meant when later
scripts and the films disagreed with it.

Fan writers can do their best to come up with explanations, but no matter
what, there are things that just don't work without a lot of creative
finessing. (Like Ford saying he'd been 'with them' for 2 years when we also
know he was one of the first recruits. You can skew the timeline to make
both statements true, but then that makes for unreasonable issues with
Straker's marriage and the visual cues given in AQoP don't support more than
a few years between the wedding and Johnny's birth.)

One can argue until they're blue in the face that one solution or another is
the best explanation, but frankly, some of these things just don't hang
together rationally and no amount of finessing is going to make it ALL work
together and have it work with the world as the rest of us know it.

As a writer, I choose which discrepancies I'm going work to make fit
together and which ones I'm going to ignore or minimize. And frankly, (IMHO)
if you can't come up with more than solution for a problem, you're not
really trying. *grin*

_____

From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Marc
Martin
Sent: Monday, June 13, 2011 9:54 AM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: RE: [SHADO] Re: UFO Bloopers

Also, we see that Chris Bentley thinks Johnny was born in 1972, which puts
a QUESTION OF PRIORITIES in 1980. As I said before, I think 1972 seems
reasonable from the point of view of Ed & Mary's marriage, but is not
reasonably considering all of the progress they had made with SHADO
HQ and their first batch of recruits.

Marc

On Mon, 13 Jun 2011 08:51 -0700, "D.A. Rorabaugh" <[hidden email]
<mailto:momkat%40dandello.net> > wrote:
> I'd seen some of the text on Straker before and it made me laugh - Straker
> 'took it upon himself' to prove there was a threat when we saw on screen
> that it was Henderson who was in the lead in convincing world leaders of
the
> threat. LOL At least they got the height right for an American astronaut
of
> the time.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]








[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Just some more comments about Star Trek and Kirks Gravestone.

Like I mentioned,The episode title is Where no man has gone before.  This is actually the second pilot filmed.  When they show the gravestone, its not a freeze frame kind of thing, but very easy for people to read.

When in the episodes Kirk goes This is Capt James T Kirk... This was filmed after the second pilot, so T is actually the mistake.  But is accepted as correct now.

I am sure most know the above, just making sure we all know it ;)

Bruce
  ----- Original Message -----
  From: D.A. Rorabaugh
  To: [hidden email]
  Sent: Monday, June 13, 2011 2:02 PM
  Subject: RE: [SHADO] Re: UFO Bloopers


   
  It really all goes back to the fact the Anderson and his writers weren't as
  careful in logic and continuity for UFO as later writers for later series
  were expected to be. I mean, how could they have possibly guessed that 40+
  years later people would be arguing about details and trying to make it all
  work logically.

  Even Roddenberry - who was noted for his meticulousness - let things through
  on STtos. He never imagined people would freeze frame Kirk's gravestone,
  make out what was on it and then argue about what it meant when later
  scripts and the films disagreed with it.

  Fan writers can do their best to come up with explanations, but no matter
  what, there are things that just don't work without a lot of creative
  finessing. (Like Ford saying he'd been 'with them' for 2 years when we also
  know he was one of the first recruits. You can skew the timeline to make
  both statements true, but then that makes for unreasonable issues with
  Straker's marriage and the visual cues given in AQoP don't support more than
  a few years between the wedding and Johnny's birth.)

  One can argue until they're blue in the face that one solution or another is
  the best explanation, but frankly, some of these things just don't hang
  together rationally and no amount of finessing is going to make it ALL work
  together and have it work with the world as the rest of us know it.

  As a writer, I choose which discrepancies I'm going work to make fit
  together and which ones I'm going to ignore or minimize. And frankly, (IMHO)
  if you can't come up with more than solution for a problem, you're not
  really trying. *grin*

  _____

  From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Marc
  Martin
  Sent: Monday, June 13, 2011 9:54 AM
  To: [hidden email]
  Subject: RE: [SHADO] Re: UFO Bloopers

  Also, we see that Chris Bentley thinks Johnny was born in 1972, which puts
  a QUESTION OF PRIORITIES in 1980. As I said before, I think 1972 seems
  reasonable from the point of view of Ed & Mary's marriage, but is not
  reasonably considering all of the progress they had made with SHADO
  HQ and their first batch of recruits.

  Marc

  On Mon, 13 Jun 2011 08:51 -0700, "D.A. Rorabaugh" <[hidden email]
  <mailto:momkat%40dandello.net> > wrote:
  > I'd seen some of the text on Straker before and it made me laugh - Straker
  > 'took it upon himself' to prove there was a threat when we saw on screen
  > that it was Henderson who was in the lead in convincing world leaders of
  the
  > threat. LOL At least they got the height right for an American astronaut
  of
  > the time.

  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



 


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Whichever version was finally accepted as 'official' (Tiberius was never
given as Kirk's middle name in the original series but was blessed much
later), there was a discrepancy that slipped through despite their best
efforts. A discrepancy that various writers later tried to explain away in
various ways.

 

  _____  

From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of
Bruce Sherman
Sent: Monday, June 13, 2011 4:51 PM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [SHADO] Re: UFO Bloopers

 

 

Just some more comments about Star Trek and Kirks Gravestone.

Like I mentioned,The episode title is Where no man has gone before. This is
actually the second pilot filmed. When they show the gravestone, its not a
freeze frame kind of thing, but very easy for people to read.

When in the episodes Kirk goes This is Capt James T Kirk... This was filmed
after the second pilot, so T is actually the mistake. But is accepted as
correct now.

I am sure most know the above, just making sure we all know it ;)

Bruce
----- Original Message -----
From: D.A. Rorabaugh
To: [hidden email] <mailto:SHADO%40yahoogroups.com>  
Sent: Monday, June 13, 2011 2:02 PM
Subject: RE: [SHADO] Re: UFO Bloopers

It really all goes back to the fact the Anderson and his writers weren't as
careful in logic and continuity for UFO as later writers for later series
were expected to be. I mean, how could they have possibly guessed that 40+
years later people would be arguing about details and trying to make it all
work logically.

Even Roddenberry - who was noted for his meticulousness - let things through
on STtos. He never imagined people would freeze frame Kirk's gravestone,
make out what was on it and then argue about what it meant when later
scripts and the films disagreed with it.

Fan writers can do their best to come up with explanations, but no matter
what, there are things that just don't work without a lot of creative
finessing. (Like Ford saying he'd been 'with them' for 2 years when we also
know he was one of the first recruits. You can skew the timeline to make
both statements true, but then that makes for unreasonable issues with
Straker's marriage and the visual cues given in AQoP don't support more than
a few years between the wedding and Johnny's birth.)

One can argue until they're blue in the face that one solution or another is
the best explanation, but frankly, some of these things just don't hang
together rationally and no amount of finessing is going to make it ALL work
together and have it work with the world as the rest of us know it.

As a writer, I choose which discrepancies I'm going work to make fit
together and which ones I'm going to ignore or minimize. And frankly, (IMHO)
if you can't come up with more than solution for a problem, you're not
really trying. *grin*

_____

From: [hidden email] <mailto:SHADO%40yahoogroups.com>
[mailto:[hidden email] <mailto:SHADO%40yahoogroups.com> ] On Behalf
Of Marc
Martin
Sent: Monday, June 13, 2011 9:54 AM
To: [hidden email] <mailto:SHADO%40yahoogroups.com>
Subject: RE: [SHADO] Re: UFO Bloopers

Also, we see that Chris Bentley thinks Johnny was born in 1972, which puts
a QUESTION OF PRIORITIES in 1980. As I said before, I think 1972 seems
reasonable from the point of view of Ed & Mary's marriage, but is not
reasonably considering all of the progress they had made with SHADO
HQ and their first batch of recruits.

Marc

On Mon, 13 Jun 2011 08:51 -0700, "D.A. Rorabaugh" <[hidden email]
<mailto:momkat%40dandello.net>
<mailto:momkat%40dandello.net> > wrote:
> I'd seen some of the text on Straker before and it made me laugh - Straker
> 'took it upon himself' to prove there was a threat when we saw on screen
> that it was Henderson who was in the lead in convincing world leaders of
the
> threat. LOL At least they got the height right for an American astronaut
of
> the time.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hi,
 
> As a writer you may interpret the discrepancies as you wish.
 
Oh, that is not something simply touching writers. It touches practically everyone who watches UFO or deals with it in some way.
 
As to interpretations - that was the point I am making. I wasn't making any. I simply looked at the facts which are presented and stripped them of the lore they unwittingly accumulated through too few viewings, bad video copies and distributions cut or maimed, or conveniently invented shortcuts, instead of sound, logical reasoning, especially where they helped fannish squee.

> But since Straker was wearing the same style of hair and suit during his
> meeting with Henderson and Freeman's official recruitment AND immediately
> following the wedding (which we know took place in 1970-71) AND he was
> wearing the same hair style during the meeting and working in HQ - the
> visual cues indicate these events were probably intended to be interpreted
> as being close in time.
 
Hmm. The husband of one of my sisters has been wearing his hair the same style since early youth (he is now well past 40). He is a reasonably senior CEO in a company producing luxury goods and has a nice yearly income. He wears rather expensive, conservative looking bespoke suits which haven't much changed their cuts and materials over several decades now.
 
Given your reasoning the last 20 years of his life all took place in the same year.
 
Or in other words: none of that are serious cues as to what timeline we are looking at. Especially not in the face of the very clearcut mention of the actual years these events span.
 
By the way, the relevant haircut - which Ed Bishop wore most of his life - is a no-nonsense, conservative hairstyle worn to the day without much change by a large number of men. And as we know, Straker would have kept wearing it, had Bishop not resented the bleaching of his own hair. The short, helmet-style wigs were a response to his refusal to turn into a male Marilyn Monroe.
 
That Straker, as this was consecutively put in the series, would see sense in turning himself out as a movie producer after that role was demanded of him on top of being the CiC of SHADO, is a logical enough explanation given us by the Andersons. Before his rather conservative personality would hardly have agreed to such a change.
 
> But in a discrepancy like this there are at least a few possibilities for
> the writer:
 
As said, there was no discrepancy.

> 1: ignore the problem - Ford never said that.
 
Why would anyone do such a thing?

> 2: explain away the 'two year' statement as something other than Ford's
>total time in SHADO - perhaps his actual time in HQ rather than SHADO - or
>maybe he was recruited and was doing something else before being brought
>'into the fold'.
No need for that, and I checked. Ford said "Just over two years" which leaves leeway enough for those additional months.

>3: skew the timeline - place most or all of SHADO's building and recruitment
>into a 1977-78 timeframe (7-8 years after its commissioning), and put AQoP
>out to 1986-87 or so.
What for? The timeline as the series presents us with works just fine.


> A decent compromise would be for Mary to have gotten pregnant around 1974 or
>75 but that still doesn't explain Ford's statement.
There is no need for compromises. The timeline is clearcut.
>Putting AQoP out to 1984-85 is still bit of a stretch. Straker didn't update
>his car for 5 years? *grin*
What is the problem with driving the same car for several decades? If it is a solid one? Most people valueing a good sportscar over here in Europe, especially one threatening to become a classic, hold on to it. The UK is notorious for phantastic classic cars and oldtimers, and a Rolls in its 50th year isn't  even considered an oldtimer, it's just a good car.
As to Straker and updating cars, he was not depicted as being keen on running after latest fashions, rather to the contrary. At the time period people drove their cars for a decade or two, or even longer.
> Why make the assumption that Straker personally investigated each of those
> 7000+ reports? Those reports could well have been forwarded from other
> agencies - If we assume SHADO had field agents from the beginning, just 10
> field investigators would take that number down to a few a month per agent.
No one said that he would have done that. That WAS the point I made. The assumption that The Long Sleep takes place in 1980 is stretching things to that point.
Prior to roughly 1975 there was no personnel in SHADO (that is even hinted at) to do the job. As we were shown it was Straker himself who investigated the UFO incident with Catherine.
The blooper is (or isn't, depending on what you hear) the mention of 1970 instead of 1974.
>While there is no direct mention of people 'out there'
>investigating things, I think it's a fair assumption that they exist and
>probably have existed for a long time.
Assumption being the key problem here.  Between 1970 and roughly 1975 there existed no trained SHADO personnel (as per Straker's and Alec's own words).
The assumption, that Military Intelligence under Straker's and Henderson's lead would help, could be considered  a logical conjecture, in the absence of ulterior information and facts. But we do have those, through the subtitles and through the much graver likelihood that we are looking at a simple blooper. Instead of twisting everything around so it fits that one blooper (which the distributors have outed as one), the less disruptive solution is keeping TLS what it clearly is, very late in the timeline.
However, things should become easier now. We have set up a canon wiki at The Ed Straker Herald, which is called UFOpedia. It can be found here:
http://ufopedia.edstraker.com
and we will be slowly filling it with the hard canon, which facts will be clearly detached from grey canon and likewise fanon.
Everyone interested in contributing can contact either Lightcudder or myself for an editing account (registration is manual only to avoid spam). That wiki should become useful for anyone wishing to check up on the real hard facts as they can be seen, heard and read onscreen.
Cheers
 
An

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hi Griff,
 
thanks for pointing these out.
 
Personally I have them, as well as Chris Bentley's book. However, neither are actual canon - not hard canon (which is exactly what you read, see and hear within the series), nor soft canon (what gets directly confirmed by the original creators of the characters etc.), nor even real grey canon (what can be strictly logically inferred from the first two).
 
E.g. That Strakers full first name is "Edward" could be considered grey canon, as Ed Bishop was credited as Edward Bishop in Identified and Gerry Anderson used to use the first names of the actors as the first names of the characters. Bishop confirmed that it was Gerry who told him to drop the "ward" of the name. However, I have yet to come across any reference for the "George" he puts into the name. The nameplate on Straker's briefcase reads E. Straker, he is addressed everywhere as E. or Ed Straker, no mention of a middle name. And Bishop's middle name was Victor.
 
Similar considerations go for the birthdate and a large variety of other data, which I find rather not very logical in places. I think with a closer look at the facts available one might come up with something nearer the really likely things.
 
Chris was truly excellent about gathering all those real fact and factlets regarding production and the actors etc., mind me. It's just his conjectures which I sometimes find a stretch. ;-)
 
Cheers
 
An
 

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

In that case, you shouldn't mind if some of us take YOUR conjectures as an
equal stretch?

 

  _____  

From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of An
Delendir
Sent: Tuesday, June 14, 2011 3:40 PM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [SHADO] Re: UFO Bloopers

 

 

Hi Griff,
 
thanks for pointing these out.
 
Personally I have them, as well as Chris Bentley's book. However, neither
are actual canon - not hard canon (which is exactly what you read, see and
hear within the series), nor soft canon (what gets directly confirmed by the
original creators of the characters etc.), nor even real grey canon (what
can be strictly logically inferred from the first two).
 
E.g. That Strakers full first name is "Edward" could be considered grey
canon, as Ed Bishop was credited as Edward Bishop in Identified and Gerry
Anderson used to use the first names of the actors as the first names of the
characters. Bishop confirmed that it was Gerry who told him to drop the
"ward" of the name. However, I have yet to come across any reference for the
"George" he puts into the name. The nameplate on Straker's briefcase reads
E. Straker, he is addressed everywhere as E. or Ed Straker, no mention of a
middle name. And Bishop's middle name was Victor.
 
Similar considerations go for the birthdate and a large variety of other
data, which I find rather not very logical in places. I think with a closer
look at the facts available one might come up with something nearer the
really likely things.
 
Chris was truly excellent about gathering all those real fact and factlets
regarding production and the actors etc., mind me. It's just his conjectures
which I sometimes find a stretch. ;-)
 
Cheers
 
An
 

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

>> 3: skew the timeline - place most or all of SHADO's building and recruitment
>> into a 1977-78 timeframe (7-8 years after its commissioning), and put AQoP
>> out to 1986-87 or so.
> What for? The timeline as the series presents us with works just fine.

And what timeline is that exactly?  Perhaps I need to rewatch CONFETTI
CHECK A-OK again, but I don't recall any exact dates for when things
took place.  It seems to me that the meeting in Nina Barry's apartment
could have occurred anywhere between 1971 - 1979.  And no matter what
year you choose, it would NOT be believable, because there is no way
they could have built all of that SHADO hardware in 10 years.  A lot
of that technology is unachievable, even today.  :-)

As far as we know, that apartment meeting could have taken place in
1972, and from 1972 - 1980 they spent building Moonbase, SID,
Skydiver, the Lunar Carrier/Module, the Mobiles, the Moon Mobiles,
plus training lots more recruits.

Marc

Got it in one Marc. CCAOK did not tell us, I watched it again this weekend just to be sure. As I said before, it's all specualtion and conjecture and each viewpoint has pros and cons associated with it. I could make a case for or against each idea that has been put forward here. I do think it's an open ended issue. :)

It's interesting to see the different points of view on the subject.

--- In [hidden email], Marc Martin <marc@...> wrote:

> Got it in one Marc. CCAOK did not tell us, I watched it again this
> weekend just to be sure. As I said before, it's all specualtion and
> conjecture and each viewpoint has pros and cons associated with it.
> I could make a case for or against each idea that has been put
> forward here. I do think it's an open ended issue. :)

Yes, I just watched CCAOK as well... I still say that 1972 is
a perfectly reasonable assumption for when Johnny was born.

We know from many episodes that it took 10 years for SHADO to
be up and running.

We know that SHADO is up and running in 1980.

Therefore, SHADO's approval (and Straker's wedding) must have
taken place in 1970.  

So the first part of CCAOK takes place in 1970.

We hear that it will takes months for Henderson to recover from
the car crash.  And we see that he does recover.

We hear that it will take months for SHADO HQ to be constructed.
And we see that it is constructed.

We hear that it takes 6 months of training for the initial
batch of recruits (and some of this overlaps with SHADO HQ
construction).  The meeting in Nina's apartment is after
that 6 months of training.  When Straker says "the worst
is over", he is referring to what the recruits must
go through, not that SHADO is almost up and running.

Mary gets pregnant, but when she falls down the stairs,
she does not appear to be 9 months pregnant.

So 1972 seems reasonable to me for Johnny's birth.

Of course, realistically it would have taken longer
to progress that far, but if we are being realistic,
SHADO wouldn't be up and running until 1995.  :-)

And I think Straker's treatment of Ford as recent
recruit to SHADO is still inconsistent with him
being part of the first batch of recruits.  With
Ford's tenure, he should actually be in charge
of something by 1980...  :-)

Marc

I admit that I'm in the early camp as well, that is John Straker being born in 1972-1974 timeframe. (I use April 1973 in my timeline.)When Ford answered Straker in Identified, I assumed the two years meant two years at HQ. As to Straker's treatment of Ford, I agree, but it's also inconsistant with the way he was treated later in the series. Ford was shown in a very positive light in Close Up. :)

Matt

--- In [hidden email], "Marc Martin" <marc@...> wrote:

Well, Bentley at least tried to explain the Ford issue: "although he has
been a SHADO operative for over 12 years, he was only assigned the Control
Room at SHADO HQ in 1978"

I figure Ford was one of those never spoken about field agents - his job was
to investigate UFO sighting and recruit people. (of course, that '12 years'
part kind of means Bentley's biography of Ford was dated about 1983/84)

Just my 2 cents worth.

 

 

 

  _____  

From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Marc
Martin
Sent: Tuesday, June 14, 2011 9:16 PM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [SHADO] Re: UFO Bloopers

 

 

> Got it in one Marc. CCAOK did not tell us, I watched it again this
> weekend just to be sure. As I said before, it's all specualtion and
> conjecture and each viewpoint has pros and cons associated with it.
> I could make a case for or against each idea that has been put
> forward here. I do think it's an open ended issue. :)

Yes, I just watched CCAOK as well... I still say that 1972 is
a perfectly reasonable assumption for when Johnny was born.

We know from many episodes that it took 10 years for SHADO to
be up and running.

We know that SHADO is up and running in 1980.

Therefore, SHADO's approval (and Straker's wedding) must have
taken place in 1970.

So the first part of CCAOK takes place in 1970.

We hear that it will takes months for Henderson to recover from
the car crash. And we see that he does recover.

We hear that it will take months for SHADO HQ to be constructed.
And we see that it is constructed.

We hear that it takes 6 months of training for the initial
batch of recruits (and some of this overlaps with SHADO HQ
construction). The meeting in Nina's apartment is after
that 6 months of training. When Straker says "the worst
is over", he is referring to what the recruits must
go through, not that SHADO is almost up and running.

Mary gets pregnant, but when she falls down the stairs,
she does not appear to be 9 months pregnant.

So 1972 seems reasonable to me for Johnny's birth.

Of course, realistically it would have taken longer
to progress that far, but if we are being realistic,
SHADO wouldn't be up and running until 1995. :-)

And I think Straker's treatment of Ford as recent
recruit to SHADO is still inconsistent with him
being part of the first batch of recruits. With
Ford's tenure, he should actually be in charge
of something by 1980... :-)

Marc





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hi Marc,
 

> And what timeline is that exactly?

A rough outlay of the timeline can be found here:

http://edstraker.net/en/june2011/articles/273/Mary%27s-Place-or-Who-is-to-Blame.htm

However, a more anal, err, precise timeline will be established on the wiki.

> Perhaps I need to rewatch CONFETTI CHECK A-OK again, but I
> don't recall any exact dates for when thingstook place.

1. The meeting takes place in the spring that SHADO is supposed to start basic functionality.

Qualifier: Discussion between Ed and Alec in the winter following Mary's announcement that she is pregnant and prior to the meeting

Alec: Well, the control complex is complete, fully operational. All we need now are the technicians.
Ed: How is the first batch of recruits making out?
Alec: Security checks, aptitude tests, six-month training, more tests. It's a tough schedule. The original 50 have been whittled down to eight.
Ed: Eight?
Alec: Yes. The second batch seem to be doing better,
Ed: When do we expect the first group to finish their training?
Alec: A few months. It'll be spring. A good time to start.
Ed: Spring. My son will be born in the spring.
Alec: Your son? How do y...

Alec clearly says that HQ is completed at that point (this takes at least 6-7 years! Makes this discussion early winter 1976 or 1977). And he also says that the HQ operatives will be ready in spring. Ed drives back to Mary just prior to her birthing AFTER the meeting, so that is the correct spring we see there and not an earlier one.

2. It takes place when Straker's son is born (see above)

3. It is the end of Straker's long, main amount of work of setting everything up (hinted at to Mary, shown by his relief and guilty bouquet of flowers as he drives home)

4. The meeting itself clarifies what it is about.

Ed: Well, it's been a long hard slog, but we're ready. We're ready.I know how hard you've all worked, I think we can assume the worst is over. And I want to thank you all.

The date is both hinted at in the UNO-meeting ("7 to 10 years"), and pinpointed by a) the milestones coming before it, b) Identified (dated to August 24th 1980) and actually also by c) Ford's comment about when he joined SHADO. Another defining date is John's death, which takes place well after Identified, but not much later than 1984, and he doesn't look or behave much younger than 7 y/o.

So...

The meeting takes place either spring 1976 or spring 1977. Given that Lightcudder just dated the modern content of Identified for me to August 24th 1980 (Lake is reading the newspaper of that date), I by now tend to place that meeting spring 1977, with Ford being vague in his months in his quote.

>It seems to me that the meeting in Nina Barry's apartment
>could have occurred anywhere between 1971 - 1979.

No, Marc. The events in CCAOK are linear, a row of events one after the other. Why just one event would happen outside this row, particularly the one which happens to be most convenient for an argument against what is such a clear dating of events, you'd need to sell me far better than that. Just to be contrary is not sufficient ;-).  

As you can see above, the meeting took place AFTER the SHADO headquarters were built, AFTER the recruits were tested and trained. Alec says HQ will be coming operative then.

Also, the flashback that we see isn't in any way arthousey or artsy (as in what is currently done with this movie gimmick). It's basic straight oldfashioned filmmaking: the showing of milestone events down a timeline, showing a development between a point A (marriage) and point B (birth of son), triggered by the witnessing of a father's joy at SHADO HQ.

Additionally we get other flashbacks in UFO and they happen to all have been linear and pretty much in order of time they take place.

> And no matter what year you choose, it would NOT be believable,
> because there is no way they could have built all of that SHADO
> hardware in 10 years. A lot of that technology is unachievable,
> even today. :-)

We get a clear statement how long it takes: 7-10 years. That's what UFO works with, it is what *we* have to work with, whether we like it or not.

However, building the structure and fitting it out is possible within 6-7 years.

The UK Aachen, one of the largest hospitals in Europe, was built in slightly over 10 years. It's a "few" (<--- heavy irony here!) factors larger than SHADO HQ with its 130000 aquare meters (equals 1399320 square feet!), faced similar excavations (as it was built into a rise) and went from zero (1970) to fully functional (1982) in just slightly more than a decade. Like SHADO it achieved a basic functionality earlier, in 1978, and again as with SHADO basic shell-state was achieved after much less, namely 3 years (1973).

So - the UFO writers really do not stretch reality there at all. If a several factors larger building like the UKA can be built in 12 years, it is not illogical to assume - as they did - that the HQ might be built in 6-7 years.

And as it is easy to see, I was and am using very realistic markers for how long each milestone takes. Ask a seasoned architect of large, non-prefab buildings, (s)he will confirm. Let me just add, I definitely know what I talk about here and can be absolutely positive about this timing of a large building project.

As to the hardware regarding machinery, SID and Co. - Marc, I hate to break the news, but it is a science fiction series! ;-)

Seriously again, though, had NASA had the financial means and the basic need to achieve, as SHADO was portrayed as having, then they would have come up with the space shuttles earlier (the plans for those were available MUCH earlier), and space stations would have existed earlier as well. Building a base on the moon as shown would have been technically possible rather early on as well.

That is what is - at least in my book - one of the major distinctions of SHADO, it shows feasible technology.

>As far as we know, that apartment meeting could have taken place in
>1972, and from 1972 - 1980 they spent building Moonbase, SID,
>Skydiver, the Lunar Carrier/Module, the Mobiles, the Moon Mobiles,
>plus training lots more recruits.

No. The meeting takes place after the underground complex of HQ is finished and operational. The building of this takes at least 6-7 years, that's a definite amount of time.

>We hear that it takes 6 months of training for the initial
>batch of recruits (and some of this overlaps with SHADO HQ
>construction). The meeting in Nina's apartment is after
>that 6 months of training. When Straker says "the worst
>is over", he is referring to what the recruits must
>go through, not that SHADO is almost up and running.

No. See above, you need to link this scene with the one which comes before and announces it right there. The sequence of both is not vague at all.

>Mary gets pregnant, but when she falls down the stairs,
>she does not appear to be 9 months pregnant.

Mary already looks  extremely pregnant when she talks with her mother. The baby shown to us is no premature baby either,  baby John looks fully baked to me (and is NOT on any sort of life support, nor in any special room or given any preemy treatment, yes that existed in 1980 and even already 1969). So, it may be a few days too early, but certainly neither weeks nor months.

As to what Bentley explains away with his invention of a 12 year long career of Ford (which wouldn't match even then the timeline), it is his faulty assumption that the break-up of Straker's marriage occurs over a short period of time. That forces him to twist the rest.

If they married in December 1970 it is absolutely impossible that Mary gives birth 1972. That means that construction indeed most likely took until winter 1976/1977 and she has the baby AFTER  the underground complex is finished, fitted and ready to be used.

Also, it would make little sense for Ford to make a mistake AND be so nervous as a veritable veteran of SHADO. The  "two years and some" quote however makes his behaviour acceptable within the norm. As to Straker being out of character there, I dunno. I do not see him as that cocksure and hard-ass as some have him here. He showed insecurity about himself and his role repeatedly. Lightcudder did a solid essay on that, and I agree with what she writes. This could account for his over-compensation with Ford, and he did that also with Foster at least twice.

So, as James said earlier in this discussion, everyone can make mistakes. That means Chris Bentley as well. Shortening the marriage was one. As to his biographies of the various characters, some are likely, some are not likely, some work with established canon facts, some don't and some go against them. Those bios are indeed conjecture and ought to be treated as such.

All that is not belittling any of his work or undebatable dedication to UFO and Fanderson and doesn't detract from his book's value at all.

To cut all this short - the wiki was set up to try to help solve some of these queries that cause so many problems. We would really appreciate support from UFO fans who want to help develop a free  resource that  is available to everyone.

Cheers

An

http://edstraker.net (The Ed Straker Herald)
http://ufopedia.edstraker.com (UFOpedia)

> Alec clearly says that HQ is completed at that point (this takes at least 6-7 years!

Well, you're welcome to your opinion, but I don't agree.  The building of
SHADO HQ was the *easiest* thing they had to do to get SHADO up and running, and
in CCAOK Alec mentions that it would take "months" to construct the underground
headquarters.

And when Straker says "the worst is over", he is referring to the training
for those initial 8 SHADO recruits.  In fact, they've barely begun working
on SHADO as a whole, and it will take another 8 years to complete.

I think you're misinterpreting what is said and shown onscreen.

The amount of time that passes between the SHADO go-ahead and Johnny's
birth is also hinted at in the script -- just search on the word "months"
and you'll find the following:

----
                         HENDERSON
               Apparently I'm stuck in this chair for another couple of
               months. Things are happening, Ed. A lot of it's going to
               fall on your shoulders.
----
                         STRAKER
               In a couple of months you'll be up and about... as fit as ever.
----
          PULL BACK TO SHOW THE ROOM IS NOW FULLY FURNISHED. A COUPLE OF MONTHS
          HAVE ELAPSED.  MARY IS IN THE ROOM - A CHANGE OF DRESS.
----
                         HENDERSON
               Very well. In a couple of months the studio may be worth a visit.
----
          START ON THE PHONE, PULL BACK TO SHOW MARY LOOKING AT IT.  SHE IS 6
          MONTHS PREGNANT.  SHE WALKS ON INTO THE LOUNGE CHECKING HER WATCH.
          STRAKER IS LATE AGAIN.
----
                         MARY
               021-4834....  Oh, it's you Mother.  How are you ? ....  I'm
               fine...  Yes, I saw him today...  Yes, he said it should be the
               first week in April....  Hmm, just another two months... of course...
----
                         FREEMAN
               Well, security checks, aptitude tests, six months of training and
               further tests, it's a pretty tough schedule.  The original fifty
               have been whittled down to eight.
----
                         FREEMAN
               In about two months.  It'll be spring; a good time to start.
----
          PAN DOWN FROM STRAKER TO A BUNCH OF FLOWERS ON THE SEAT BESIDE HIM.
          HE SINGS TO HIMSELF, THE UNDERGROUND HQ IS COMPLETE, THE FIRST
          OPERATIVES ARE ABOUT TO MOVE IN, FOR THE FIRST TIME IN MONTHS THE
          PRESSURE IS OFF.

----

So again, the flashback in CCAOK really only spans a couple years, no
matter what your wiki claims... :-)

Marc

Well, since I've actually seen bridges, sky-scrapers, and huge multi-story
parking garages go up in less that 12 months (have you seen the foundation
of a sky-scraper or a multi-story parking garage with a multi-acre
footprint? You could hide SHADO HQ in the foundation/basement of most of
them with parking spaces to boot.) So the insistence that HQ took 5+ years
is not supported by reality.

The hold-up in most building projects is permitting and inspection - SHADO
didn't need to worry about permitting and inspections would have been by
military inspectors and engineers who would have been working on SHADO's
timetable, not showing up at their whim. So everything could go ahead at max
speed. Many many times faster than a civilian project of similar size.

So less than 12 months from ground breaking to usable shell with ventilation
and utility lighting is easily possible.

And putting the completion of HQ and the first batch of recruits to 1977 or
thereabouts implies (if not outright states) that most of building of the
sky-diver fleet, Moonbase and its ancillary support on Earth , launching of
SID, training of all the necessary crews for those posts, all took place
between 1977 and 1980.  

If it actually took 6-7 years to build HQ, how long did it take to build
Moonbase and the Sky-divers and their bases? Would those have been built
before HQ was finished or would they have been delayed until SHADO had
adequate secure communications and a secure place to coordinate the building
from?

And since Freeman seemed to be in charge of the building, recruitment, and
training (at least he's the one reporting to Straker about them) what was
Straker doing while HQ was being built for six or so years?

 

And as Marc pointed out in another post - The flashback in CCAOK clearly
covers a fairly short span of time - a few years at the outside.

 

  _____  

From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of An
Delendir
Sent: Wednesday, June 15, 2011 2:53 AM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [SHADO] UFO Bloopers

 

 

Hi Marc,


> And what timeline is that exactly?

A rough outlay of the timeline can be found here:

http://edstraker.net/en/june2011/articles/273/Mary%27s-Place-or-Who-is-to-Bl
ame.htm

However, a more anal, err, precise timeline will be established on the wiki.

> Perhaps I need to rewatch CONFETTI CHECK A-OK again, but I
> don't recall any exact dates for when thingstook place.

1. The meeting takes place in the spring that SHADO is supposed to start
basic functionality.

Qualifier: Discussion between Ed and Alec in the winter following Mary's
announcement that she is pregnant and prior to the meeting

Alec: Well, the control complex is complete, fully operational. All we need
now are the technicians.
Ed: How is the first batch of recruits making out?
Alec: Security checks, aptitude tests, six-month training, more tests. It's
a tough schedule. The original 50 have been whittled down to eight.
Ed: Eight?
Alec: Yes. The second batch seem to be doing better,
Ed: When do we expect the first group to finish their training?
Alec: A few months. It'll be spring. A good time to start.
Ed: Spring. My son will be born in the spring.
Alec: Your son? How do y...

Alec clearly says that HQ is completed at that point (this takes at least
6-7 years! Makes this discussion early winter 1976 or 1977). And he also
says that the HQ operatives will be ready in spring. Ed drives back to Mary
just prior to her birthing AFTER the meeting, so that is the correct spring
we see there and not an earlier one.

2. It takes place when Straker's son is born (see above)

3. It is the end of Straker's long, main amount of work of setting
everything up (hinted at to Mary, shown by his relief and guilty bouquet of
flowers as he drives home)

4. The meeting itself clarifies what it is about.

Ed: Well, it's been a long hard slog, but we're ready. We're ready.I know
how hard you've all worked, I think we can assume the worst is over. And I
want to thank you all.

The date is both hinted at in the UNO-meeting ("7 to 10 years"), and
pinpointed by a) the milestones coming before it, b) Identified (dated to
August 24th 1980) and actually also by c) Ford's comment about when he
joined SHADO. Another defining date is John's death, which takes place well
after Identified, but not much later than 1984, and he doesn't look or
behave much younger than 7 y/o.

So...

The meeting takes place either spring 1976 or spring 1977. Given that
Lightcudder just dated the modern content of Identified for me to August
24th 1980 (Lake is reading the newspaper of that date), I by now tend to
place that meeting spring 1977, with Ford being vague in his months in his
quote.

>It seems to me that the meeting in Nina Barry's apartment
>could have occurred anywhere between 1971 - 1979.

No, Marc. The events in CCAOK are linear, a row of events one after the
other. Why just one event would happen outside this row, particularly the
one which happens to be most convenient for an argument against what is such
a clear dating of events, you'd need to sell me far better than that. Just
to be contrary is not sufficient ;-).

As you can see above, the meeting took place AFTER the SHADO headquarters
were built, AFTER the recruits were tested and trained. Alec says HQ will be
coming operative then.

Also, the flashback that we see isn't in any way arthousey or artsy (as in
what is currently done with this movie gimmick). It's basic straight
oldfashioned filmmaking: the showing of milestone events down a timeline,
showing a development between a point A (marriage) and point B (birth of
son), triggered by the witnessing of a father's joy at SHADO HQ.

Additionally we get other flashbacks in UFO and they happen to all have been
linear and pretty much in order of time they take place.

> And no matter what year you choose, it would NOT be believable,
> because there is no way they could have built all of that SHADO
> hardware in 10 years. A lot of that technology is unachievable,
> even today. :-)

We get a clear statement how long it takes: 7-10 years. That's what UFO
works with, it is what *we* have to work with, whether we like it or not.

However, building the structure and fitting it out is possible within 6-7
years.

The UK Aachen, one of the largest hospitals in Europe, was built in slightly
over 10 years. It's a "few" (<--- heavy irony here!) factors larger than
SHADO HQ with its 130000 aquare meters (equals 1399320 square feet!), faced
similar excavations (as it was built into a rise) and went from zero (1970)
to fully functional (1982) in just slightly more than a decade. Like SHADO
it achieved a basic functionality earlier, in 1978, and again as with SHADO
basic shell-state was achieved after much less, namely 3 years (1973).

So - the UFO writers really do not stretch reality there at all. If a
several factors larger building like the UKA can be built in 12 years, it is
not illogical to assume - as they did - that the HQ might be built in 6-7
years.

And as it is easy to see, I was and am using very realistic markers for how
long each milestone takes. Ask a seasoned architect of large, non-prefab
buildings, (s)he will confirm. Let me just add, I definitely know what I
talk about here and can be absolutely positive about this timing of a large
building project.

As to the hardware regarding machinery, SID and Co. - Marc, I hate to break
the news, but it is a science fiction series! ;-)

Seriously again, though, had NASA had the financial means and the basic need
to achieve, as SHADO was portrayed as having, then they would have come up
with the space shuttles earlier (the plans for those were available MUCH
earlier), and space stations would have existed earlier as well. Building a
base on the moon as shown would have been technically possible rather early
on as well.

That is what is - at least in my book - one of the major distinctions of
SHADO, it shows feasible technology.

>As far as we know, that apartment meeting could have taken place in
>1972, and from 1972 - 1980 they spent building Moonbase, SID,
>Skydiver, the Lunar Carrier/Module, the Mobiles, the Moon Mobiles,
>plus training lots more recruits.

No. The meeting takes place after the underground complex of HQ is finished
and operational. The building of this takes at least 6-7 years, that's a
definite amount of time.

>We hear that it takes 6 months of training for the initial
>batch of recruits (and some of this overlaps with SHADO HQ
>construction). The meeting in Nina's apartment is after
>that 6 months of training. When Straker says "the worst
>is over", he is referring to what the recruits must
>go through, not that SHADO is almost up and running.

No. See above, you need to link this scene with the one which comes before
and announces it right there. The sequence of both is not vague at all.

>Mary gets pregnant, but when she falls down the stairs,
>she does not appear to be 9 months pregnant.

Mary already looks extremely pregnant when she talks with her mother. The
baby shown to us is no premature baby either, baby John looks fully baked to
me (and is NOT on any sort of life support, nor in any special room or given
any preemy treatment, yes that existed in 1980 and even already 1969). So,
it may be a few days too early, but certainly neither weeks nor months.

As to what Bentley explains away with his invention of a 12 year long career
of Ford (which wouldn't match even then the timeline), it is his faulty
assumption that the break-up of Straker's marriage occurs over a short
period of time. That forces him to twist the rest.

If they married in December 1970 it is absolutely impossible that Mary gives
birth 1972. That means that construction indeed most likely took until
winter 1976/1977 and she has the baby AFTER the underground complex is
finished, fitted and ready to be used.

Also, it would make little sense for Ford to make a mistake AND be so
nervous as a veritable veteran of SHADO. The "two years and some" quote
however makes his behaviour acceptable within the norm. As to Straker being
out of character there, I dunno. I do not see him as that cocksure and
hard-ass as some have him here. He showed insecurity about himself and his
role repeatedly. Lightcudder did a solid essay on that, and I agree with
what she writes. This could account for his over-compensation with Ford, and
he did that also with Foster at least twice.

So, as James said earlier in this discussion, everyone can make mistakes.
That means Chris Bentley as well. Shortening the marriage was one. As to his
biographies of the various characters, some are likely, some are not likely,
some work with established canon facts, some don't and some go against them.
Those bios are indeed conjecture and ought to be treated as such.

All that is not belittling any of his work or undebatable dedication to UFO
and Fanderson and doesn't detract from his book's value at all.

To cut all this short - the wiki was set up to try to help solve some of
these queries that cause so many problems. We would really appreciate
support from UFO fans who want to help develop a free resource that is
available to everyone.

Cheers

An

http://edstraker.net (The Ed Straker Herald)
http://ufopedia.edstraker.com (UFOpedia)





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

i was an o5c teletype operator back in 82,and i will tell you as a fact that we had to serve in the field for a number of weeks, months or years, depending on the base, as a combat soldier, also the mos training for that job is almost the longest on in the military, and intelligence feilds are the same way, so ford might have spent at least 3 years training, and then another few months in combat or investigation before he ever even went to a desk job.
im sure that s.h.a.d.o would be even more intensive and thurough in thier standards. making it jump probably around to 5 years just as a non- command officer doing field work.
he was also ''top in his field'' according to headquarters standards, which meant at least 7 years as a covert ops teletype combat nco or officer.
jim


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

it looks to me that the particullar case of moon base, the way that they acted was to modify an actual depot already existing on the moon, and then build fighters and sid, etc.......
jim

--- On Wed, 6/15/11, D.A. Rorabaugh <[hidden email]> wrote:


From: D.A. Rorabaugh <[hidden email]>
Subject: RE: [SHADO] UFO Bloopers
To: [hidden email]
Date: Wednesday, June 15, 2011, 7:31 AM


 



Well, since I've actually seen bridges, sky-scrapers, and huge multi-story
parking garages go up in less that 12 months (have you seen the foundation
of a sky-scraper or a multi-story parking garage with a multi-acre
footprint? You could hide SHADO HQ in the foundation/basement of most of
them with parking spaces to boot.) So the insistence that HQ took 5+ years
is not supported by reality.

The hold-up in most building projects is permitting and inspection - SHADO
didn't need to worry about permitting and inspections would have been by
military inspectors and engineers who would have been working on SHADO's
timetable, not showing up at their whim. So everything could go ahead at max
speed. Many many times faster than a civilian project of similar size.

So less than 12 months from ground breaking to usable shell with ventilation
and utility lighting is easily possible.

And putting the completion of HQ and the first batch of recruits to 1977 or
thereabouts implies (if not outright states) that most of building of the
sky-diver fleet, Moonbase and its ancillary support on Earth , launching of
SID, training of all the necessary crews for those posts, all took place
between 1977 and 1980.

If it actually took 6-7 years to build HQ, how long did it take to build
Moonbase and the Sky-divers and their bases? Would those have been built
before HQ was finished or would they have been delayed until SHADO had
adequate secure communications and a secure place to coordinate the building
from?

And since Freeman seemed to be in charge of the building, recruitment, and
training (at least he's the one reporting to Straker about them) what was
Straker doing while HQ was being built for six or so years?

And as Marc pointed out in another post - The flashback in CCAOK clearly
covers a fairly short span of time - a few years at the outside.

_____

From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of An
Delendir
Sent: Wednesday, June 15, 2011 2:53 AM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [SHADO] UFO Bloopers

Hi Marc,

> And what timeline is that exactly?

A rough outlay of the timeline can be found here:

http://edstraker.net/en/june2011/articles/273/Mary%27s-Place-or-Who-is-to-Bl
ame.htm

However, a more anal, err, precise timeline will be established on the wiki.

> Perhaps I need to rewatch CONFETTI CHECK A-OK again, but I
> don't recall any exact dates for when thingstook place.

1. The meeting takes place in the spring that SHADO is supposed to start
basic functionality.

Qualifier: Discussion between Ed and Alec in the winter following Mary's
announcement that she is pregnant and prior to the meeting

Alec: Well, the control complex is complete, fully operational. All we need
now are the technicians.
Ed: How is the first batch of recruits making out?
Alec: Security checks, aptitude tests, six-month training, more tests. It's
a tough schedule. The original 50 have been whittled down to eight.
Ed: Eight?
Alec: Yes. The second batch seem to be doing better,
Ed: When do we expect the first group to finish their training?
Alec: A few months. It'll be spring. A good time to start.
Ed: Spring. My son will be born in the spring.
Alec: Your son? How do y...

Alec clearly says that HQ is completed at that point (this takes at least
6-7 years! Makes this discussion early winter 1976 or 1977). And he also
says that the HQ operatives will be ready in spring. Ed drives back to Mary
just prior to her birthing AFTER the meeting, so that is the correct spring
we see there and not an earlier one.

2. It takes place when Straker's son is born (see above)

3. It is the end of Straker's long, main amount of work of setting
everything up (hinted at to Mary, shown by his relief and guilty bouquet of
flowers as he drives home)

4. The meeting itself clarifies what it is about.

Ed: Well, it's been a long hard slog, but we're ready. We're ready.I know
how hard you've all worked, I think we can assume the worst is over. And I
want to thank you all.

The date is both hinted at in the UNO-meeting ("7 to 10 years"), and
pinpointed by a) the milestones coming before it, b) Identified (dated to
August 24th 1980) and actually also by c) Ford's comment about when he
joined SHADO. Another defining date is John's death, which takes place well
after Identified, but not much later than 1984, and he doesn't look or
behave much younger than 7 y/o.

So...

The meeting takes place either spring 1976 or spring 1977. Given that
Lightcudder just dated the modern content of Identified for me to August
24th 1980 (Lake is reading the newspaper of that date), I by now tend to
place that meeting spring 1977, with Ford being vague in his months in his
quote.

>It seems to me that the meeting in Nina Barry's apartment
>could have occurred anywhere between 1971 - 1979.

No, Marc. The events in CCAOK are linear, a row of events one after the
other. Why just one event would happen outside this row, particularly the
one which happens to be most convenient for an argument against what is such
a clear dating of events, you'd need to sell me far better than that. Just
to be contrary is not sufficient ;-).

As you can see above, the meeting took place AFTER the SHADO headquarters
were built, AFTER the recruits were tested and trained. Alec says HQ will be
coming operative then.

Also, the flashback that we see isn't in any way arthousey or artsy (as in
what is currently done with this movie gimmick). It's basic straight
oldfashioned filmmaking: the showing of milestone events down a timeline,
showing a development between a point A (marriage) and point B (birth of
son), triggered by the witnessing of a father's joy at SHADO HQ.

Additionally we get other flashbacks in UFO and they happen to all have been
linear and pretty much in order of time they take place.

> And no matter what year you choose, it would NOT be believable,
> because there is no way they could have built all of that SHADO
> hardware in 10 years. A lot of that technology is unachievable,
> even today. :-)

We get a clear statement how long it takes: 7-10 years. That's what UFO
works with, it is what *we* have to work with, whether we like it or not.

However, building the structure and fitting it out is possible within 6-7
years.

The UK Aachen, one of the largest hospitals in Europe, was built in slightly
over 10 years. It's a "few" (<--- heavy irony here!) factors larger than
SHADO HQ with its 130000 aquare meters (equals 1399320 square feet!), faced
similar excavations (as it was built into a rise) and went from zero (1970)
to fully functional (1982) in just slightly more than a decade. Like SHADO
it achieved a basic functionality earlier, in 1978, and again as with SHADO
basic shell-state was achieved after much less, namely 3 years (1973).

So - the UFO writers really do not stretch reality there at all. If a
several factors larger building like the UKA can be built in 12 years, it is
not illogical to assume - as they did - that the HQ might be built in 6-7
years.

And as it is easy to see, I was and am using very realistic markers for how
long each milestone takes. Ask a seasoned architect of large, non-prefab
buildings, (s)he will confirm. Let me just add, I definitely know what I
talk about here and can be absolutely positive about this timing of a large
building project.

As to the hardware regarding machinery, SID and Co. - Marc, I hate to break
the news, but it is a science fiction series! ;-)

Seriously again, though, had NASA had the financial means and the basic need
to achieve, as SHADO was portrayed as having, then they would have come up
with the space shuttles earlier (the plans for those were available MUCH
earlier), and space stations would have existed earlier as well. Building a
base on the moon as shown would have been technically possible rather early
on as well.

That is what is - at least in my book - one of the major distinctions of
SHADO, it shows feasible technology.

>As far as we know, that apartment meeting could have taken place in
>1972, and from 1972 - 1980 they spent building Moonbase, SID,
>Skydiver, the Lunar Carrier/Module, the Mobiles, the Moon Mobiles,
>plus training lots more recruits.

No. The meeting takes place after the underground complex of HQ is finished
and operational. The building of this takes at least 6-7 years, that's a
definite amount of time.

>We hear that it takes 6 months of training for the initial
>batch of recruits (and some of this overlaps with SHADO HQ
>construction). The meeting in Nina's apartment is after
>that 6 months of training. When Straker says "the worst
>is over", he is referring to what the recruits must
>go through, not that SHADO is almost up and running.

No. See above, you need to link this scene with the one which comes before
and announces it right there. The sequence of both is not vague at all.

>Mary gets pregnant, but when she falls down the stairs,
>she does not appear to be 9 months pregnant.

Mary already looks extremely pregnant when she talks with her mother. The
baby shown to us is no premature baby either, baby John looks fully baked to
me (and is NOT on any sort of life support, nor in any special room or given
any preemy treatment, yes that existed in 1980 and even already 1969). So,
it may be a few days too early, but certainly neither weeks nor months.

As to what Bentley explains away with his invention of a 12 year long career
of Ford (which wouldn't match even then the timeline), it is his faulty
assumption that the break-up of Straker's marriage occurs over a short
period of time. That forces him to twist the rest.

If they married in December 1970 it is absolutely impossible that Mary gives
birth 1972. That means that construction indeed most likely took until
winter 1976/1977 and she has the baby AFTER the underground complex is
finished, fitted and ready to be used.

Also, it would make little sense for Ford to make a mistake AND be so
nervous as a veritable veteran of SHADO. The "two years and some" quote
however makes his behaviour acceptable within the norm. As to Straker being
out of character there, I dunno. I do not see him as that cocksure and
hard-ass as some have him here. He showed insecurity about himself and his
role repeatedly. Lightcudder did a solid essay on that, and I agree with
what she writes. This could account for his over-compensation with Ford, and
he did that also with Foster at least twice.

So, as James said earlier in this discussion, everyone can make mistakes.
That means Chris Bentley as well. Shortening the marriage was one. As to his
biographies of the various characters, some are likely, some are not likely,
some work with established canon facts, some don't and some go against them.
Those bios are indeed conjecture and ought to be treated as such.

All that is not belittling any of his work or undebatable dedication to UFO
and Fanderson and doesn't detract from his book's value at all.

To cut all this short - the wiki was set up to try to help solve some of
these queries that cause so many problems. We would really appreciate
support from UFO fans who want to help develop a free resource that is
available to everyone.

Cheers

An

http://edstraker.net (The Ed Straker Herald)
http://ufopedia.edstraker.com (UFOpedia)

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]








[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

--- In [hidden email], "Marc Martin" <marc@...> wrote:
> And I think Straker's treatment of Ford as recent
> recruit to SHADO is still inconsistent with him
> being part of the first batch of recruits.  With
> Ford's tenure, he should actually be in charge
> of something by 1980...  :-)

Marc,
I always had a problem with that too!  As pivotal as his role at the comm is for HQ, I really expected him to be a colonel.  And Straker treats him like a flunky, which really is odd.  You don't put a low level person in charge of the comm!  I don't think his role was well-thought out at all.
Yours,
Denise