*DATE: February 19, 1943
*DATE: February 19, 1943. TIME: CLASS: Surface radar
LOCATION: SOURCES: Web reference
No. 18 Radar Station RAAF,
Kiama, New South Wales, Australia
RADAR DURATION: unspecified
EVALUATION: No official--originally written off as operator mistake
Added Case: Aldrich
Internet references:
INITIAL SUMMARY: Excerpt form (An Unidentified Plot at Kiama by Jo Dunbar (nee Lehmann)
Ms Lehmann tracked a hardly discernable contact It was 19 February 1943. The place 18RS on Saddleback Mountain, The return was constantly being lost on the scope no Allied traffic was in the area. No interception took place as the report was considered to vague, and no visual contact was made.
NOTES: Mystery "solved" decades later: A Mr. Graeme Steinbeck found an account in Sydney Morning Herald by David Jenkins concerning a Japanese pilot, Susumi Ito, who had made aerial reconnaissance to Australia twice, the second time was down the New South Wales coast on 19 Feb 1943 using the terrain to shield and low altitude to shield his intrusion. His plane was submarine bases. A full account is in a book by David Jenkins, entitled Battle Surface: Japan's Submarine War Against Australia, 1942-45.
Reactions to Ms Lehmann's report at the time was derisive and implied that she was incompetent. Such reactions continue down to present day as indicated more than once in incidents in this catalogue. There is then a reluctance to report something out of the ordinary.
Original reference is given as "More Radar Yarns" Edited by Ed Simmonds
STATUS: Japanese submarine launched seaplane.
*DATE: April 1944 TIME: Evening CLASS: Surface radar
Late 1943 or Early 1944 (date of second version)
LOCATION: SOURCES: Letter to CUFOS, received July 20, 1983
Tarawa
RADAR DURATION: unspecified
EVALUATION: No official
Added Case: Aldrich
INITIAL SUMMARY: (Admittedly, this is not much of a sighing report. In 1943, we had no ideas that U. F. O.(s existed, so I pass this along simply as a possible matter of interest.
(In late 1943 or early 1944 (following the invasion of Tarawa on November 23, 1943, I was on evening duty at our Argus 16 (C. I. C.( (Combat Information Center) and senior officer present. We began receiving radar plots on our plotting board which showed a track running roughly north to south at a range of some 40 miles to the west of our location adjacent to Mullinix Field.
(Since the plots indicated that our (bogey( was traveling at a speed of some 750 miles an hour, we were greatly interested because there was no known aircraft at that time which could travel at that speed, and we were conjecturing that this might be some reconnaissance aircraft (Presumably Jap since it displayed no IFF), when a second and then a third (bogey( followed the track of the first across the board, running at the same apparent speed.
(The (we( to which I refer, were perhaps three (plotters( working on the board and one officer assisting me, as well as several radarman transmitting (blips( right off the tube. I no longer recall their names but have a roster of personnel with addresses existing at the time, and it might be possible to trace the participants, but running them down would hardly be worth the effort for corroboration.
(As the time, I entered the (anomaly( in the log and the following day asked our chief radar technician to check out the equipment and possibility of unusual weather (distortions( such as temperature inversion, which might have caused the sightings. His reply was (negative( in both cases.
(Virtually the same (tracks( were repeated for several nights following.
Later, by recollection, I report this to NICAP [National Investigations Committee on Aerial Phenomena], of which I was a very early member, but apparently the experience was not published.(
Matt Dillingham
211 Dipsea Road
Seadrift
Stinson Beach, CA 94970
This account was published in the Center for UFO Studies (CUFOS) Associate Newsletter, for December 1983-January 1984, Volume 4, Number 6.
NOTES: An early longer and more detail account did exist at one time in the NICAP. It appears to have been lost over the years with the several movements of the files. The repeating of the sightings over several days does suggest a reoccurring pattern possible in the diurnal changes of the atmosphere during the period of the sightings.
While the complete earlier account may not exist, it was quoted in the National Investigations Committee on Aerial Phenomena (NICAP), UFO Investigator, Volume 1, No. 1, July 1957, in an article by Major Donald E. Keyhoe, "The Flying Saucer Story - A History of Unidentified Flying Objects--Beginning a Series." A summary was published in the 'Mysteries of the Skies', by Gordon Lore and Harold Denault, pp. 126-127:
"One day in April, radar plotters for Argus 16 suddenly picked up a 'bogey' - the blip of an unknown object - moving swiftly from North to South. The speed was calculated at approximately 700 miles per hour - far greater than any aircraft then known to exist.
"The radar sets were in excellent condition, and the operators, Dillingham emphasizes, were all expert plotters. Even so, some incredulous Navy officers at first called it poor calibration. But not long after this, there was a second mysterious 'bogey,' and again Navy plotters computed the speed at 700 miles per hour. When this happened once more, Dillingham and his ... group knew there was no error.(
STATUS: TBP
*DATE: February 12, 1945 TIME: Afternoon local time CLASS: Surface radar, Air visual
LOCATION: vic of SOURCES: Website
Alethea
RADAR DURATION: unspecified
EVALUATION: No official
Added Case: Aldrich
Web Reference:
A WWII F6F Navy Fighter Pilot(s Experiences in the Pacific
by LCDR Norman P. Stark USNR(R), January 1, 2000
INITIAL SUMMARY: The witnesses flying an F6F in Combat Air Patrol (CAP) over the aircraft carrier the USS Wasp and the rest of an anchored fleet was sent by the Fighter Director to investigate a radar contact 15 miles West of the fleet. When the planes assigned to the CAP arrived at the indicated position, they found no enemy aircraft just something flashing in the sun as it settled to the surface. What they surmised was that a Japanese plane had dropped windows and quickly headed away from the fleet.
In the afternoon, a radar contact at 30,000 feet and 10 miles West of the fleet. By the time the F6F(s had reach 30,000 feet the contact had overflown the fleet and returned to the West. They did sight some kind of apparently indistinct object which continued to outdistance them despite all their efforts. They wondered if it was a Japanese jet.
NOTES: Some have objected that the Japanese did not use windows during World War II. This is incorrect. Windows were used against the 459th Night Fighter Squadron. Intelligence publications of the period pictured captured Japanese planes with sophisticated window dispersing devices.
STATUS: TBP
*DATE: February 22, 1945 TIME: NLT 0930 p. m. local CLASS: Air radar, Air visual
LOCATION: SOURCES: Letter to Project Blue Book, 1952
ChiChi Gima,
Iwo Gima
RADAR DURATION: unspecified
EVALUATION: No official
Added Case: Aldrich
Web Reference:
PRECIS: During night bombing mission the crew of a B-24 bomber of the 11th Bomb Wing saw two (exhausts( and picked indications of the object on their radar. It followed the plane 20 miles out to sea, where it vanished off the scope. Observers believed it to be a night fighter.
NOTES: Radar was SCR 717C. The return was always outside the altitude circle, that is the distance from the plane to the surface. The air fields on Iwo Gima and other islands were closed due to the invasion, so the Japanese could probably not flying from those fields.
The unit identification in the account is probably wrong as the legibility of the microfilm copy of the witness( letter leaves much to be desired. The witness was probably assigned to the 98th Bomber Squadron of the 11th Bomb Wing which used B-24 bombers at this time. In the account it mentions the 98th (bomb group,( that however is probably not referring to the officially designated 98th Bomb Group which was at this time was active in Europe. Rather this is the designation of a task organization which has as its nucleus the 98th Bomb Squadron.
Several reports not involving radar discussed objects following bombers during and after air raids in contemporary intelligence publications which told of sightings of what appeared to be unusual enemy developments. Here is an excerpt from an organization engaged in the European Theater, the US Army Air Forces XII Tactical Air Command's Intelligence Information Bulletin, no. 6, January 28, 1945, carried a report under the heading "Flak Developments":
( There have however been several reports of the phenomenon which is described as "silver balls", seen mainly below 10,000 feet; tentative suggestions have been made as to their origin and purpose, but as yet no satisfactory explanation has been found.(
The same bulletin for June 4, 1945, discusses reports from Japan:
DON'T LOOK NOW, BUT --:
Mention has previously been made in these pages to the existence of German airborne controlled missiles Hs.298, Hs.293, X4 and Hs.117. Many reports have been received from Bomber Command crews of flaming missiles being directed at, and sometimes following the aircraft, suggesting the use of remote control and/or homing devices. It is known that the Germans kept their Japanese Allies informed of technical developments and the following report, taken verbatim from Headquarters, U. S. A. F. P. O. A. , [Pacific Ocean Area] G.2 Periodic Report No. 67, further suggests that the Japanese are using similar weapons to those reported by our own crews:
"During the course of a raid by Super-Fortresses on the Tachikawa aircraft plant, and the industrial area of Kawasaki, both in the Tokyo area, a number of Super-Fortresses reported having been followed or pursued by "red balls of fire" described as being approximately the size of a basketball with a phosphorescent glow. Some were reported to have tails of blinking light.
(These (balls( appeared generally out of nowhere, only one having been seen to ascend from a relatively low altitude to the rear of a B-29. No accurate estimate could be reached as to the distance between the balls and the B-29's. No amount of evasion of the most violent nature succeeded in shaking the balls. They succeeded in following the Super-Fortresses through rapid changes of altitude and speed and sharp turns, and held B-29s' courses through clouds. One B-29 reported outdistancing a ball only by accelerating to 295 mph, after which the pursuing ball turned around
and headed back to land.
( Individual pursuits lasted as long as six minutes, and one ball followed a Super-Fortress 30 miles out to sea. The origin of the balls is not known. Indication points to some form of radio-direction, either from the ground or following enemy aircraft. The apparent objective of the balls, no doubt, is destruction of the Super-Fortresses by contact. Both interception and AA [anti-aircraft] have proved entirely ineffective, the enemy has apparently developed a new weapon with which to attempt countering our thrusts."
(SOURCE: RAF, Fighter Command Intelligence and Operational Summary No. 30, dated 15 May 1945).
Such reports of pacing or following bombers were also available to the general public. See, for example The New York Times, January 9, 1945, page 3, column 3:
Japanese Employ Robots For Air Defense in China
Associated Press
Kunming, China, Jan. 6 (Delayed)--The Japanese are using some kind of flying bomb for the air defense of China.
Announcing this today, Maj. Gen. Claire Chennault said it had not been determined whether the bombs were launched from planes or the ground. So far they have had no great success. Fliers told of having seen (objects following or paralleling( the course of American planes. In each case the pilots were able to evade the objects.
The Japanese Air Force is incapable of defense, so they are bound to work out something,( commented General Chenault, commander of the United States Fourteenth Air Force.
Another account of objects following aircraft come from the Madison (Wisconsin State Journal(, July 8, 1947
Veteran Recalls Early (Saucers(
Flying disk reports reminded veteran Gerry Dumphy, 25 Anyigner Ct., a student at the U. of Wisc. Of reports of mystery fireballs which supposedly attacked big planes on their missions over Japanese Islands in May and June of 1945.
The first (fireball( reported was during a night raid against Tokyo on May 23, 1945, Dumphy was a bombardier with the 52nd squadron of the 29th bombing group stationed at Guam. He recalls now the (fireballs( approached the planes and followed them out to sea as they returned homeward after dropping their bombs.
He described them as (round, speedy balls of fire, fast as a B-29, but not as maneuverable.( Or as (burning warheads suspended from parachutes,( or as (molten chunks of steel.(
Often, excited gunners would fire on pursing (fireballs;( missiles would miss their targets and fall into the sea. Reports came in from every B-29 base in the Marianas. As time wore on, the fireballs (became, more maneuverable and followed the superforts further out to sea.( None were reported seen during daylight hours.
One pilot seeing a fireball, flew into a cloud formation. It was still following when the plane emerged. In this case the fireball was explained as the planet Venus as its position remained at 9 o(clock. [Venus was at its brightest during this time.]
During the World War II period many unusual aerial devices and phenomena were officially reported or stories come out during that time or after the war. Various appearances, configurations, numbers, maneuvers and formations were reported. Theories about the sightings were generally that they were enemy devices, some type of unusual natural (probably electrical) phenomena, illusions, or originated with stressed out observers. Such reports came in from all sectors of the conflict and even during ferrying operations in peaceful sectors of the globe.
Here is another such report probably not attributable to Japanese flying bombs or baka bombers from the letters received at ATIC at Wright-Patterson AFB after the publication the popular Life magazine article in April 1952.
Gentlemen:
Under the stimulus of an article in Life Magazine (7 April 1952) I offer the following--for what it may be worth(
In 1945 (my memory fails at the time of year) I was a Quartermaster aboard the U. S. S. L. S. M. 270--- heading (I think) from Okinawa to Samar, P. I. It must have been after the Japanese surrender, within a month after. We were not in convoy. It was between 12 midnight and 3:45 in the morning that the Office of the Deck (Lt. JG John Kopke and myself observed two green lights appearing the sky off our port bow. They were about 8-10 degrees up and bearing about 330 degrees relative to whatever heading we were on at the time. The night was without moonlight (it may have set or not yet come up) and a clear sky. They grew larger as they approached and passed us to the port (elev. 35-40 degrees high) and disappeared astern at about the same elevations as that which they appeared. The light was a definite, rich green (Kelly green as the Life article), seemed fairly steady and the whole illuminated. The shape was circular: left a green haze immediately behind them no more than twice their diameter. As to size, I had nothing to compare them to other than the stars; say roughly the size of a baseball at twenty feet. Both the O. D. and myself agreed that the speed was incredible (we both saw them) taking from 20 to 30 seconds to mark their passage across the sky---strictly parallel to the apparent plane of the Earth. No noise was noticeable over the sound of ship(s engines.
At the time I was of the opinion that they were meteors, although their seeming horizontal path was not explainable [sic]. I was rather enthused over the observation and knew that the Bureau of Navigation was interested in observed meteors. I entered notes in the Quartermasters( log. The O. D. depreciated the idea and deleted the entry when he came down from the bridge to write the Rough Deck Log. It may be that the entry is yet decipherable from he erasure. The Logs should be on file at BuShips.
Prior to active duty I had 2 ( years of engineering at Tufts College (Medford, Mass.): in view of which I feel that my observations were sufficiently objective and skeptical. In addition, believe me this is not a (crank( reactions
Sincerely yours,
Frederick M. Seehell
Manchester, Mass., 4 April 1952
This letter brings up another problem concerning UFO reports in particular and reports of various phenomena collected for well over 50 years by the US Navy Hydrographic Office. In ships logs a specific area was reserved for Hydrographic reports of meteors, unusual magnetic readings, waterspouts, ball lightning, or any unusual phenomena. However, few if any logs have any entries here. As in the letter about watch officers or the ship(s captain are reluctant to report anything out of the ordinary. After checking 65 US Navy logs for ships which either had official UFO reports on files or for which crewmembers (in some cases the ship(s captain) wrote accounts of UFO activity only one case was found in a ship(s deck log. Various naval officer explained that such UFO reports might exist in other documents, such a war diaries, C. I. C. logs, or other operational documents, or in special reports drafted after the incident. Here is the once example found to date for the Preliminary Report on the 1947 UFO Wave:
*Persian Gulf, 6 September 1947, 2140 hours, multiple objects.
Richard Carruthers, manager of Bioproducts, Inc in Warrenton, Oregon shared a letter form his son with the newspaper. The US Navy Oiler Chipola was in the Persian Gulf when young Richard Carruthers, Jr. and three other spotted eight round spots of light flying in a group. They pass within a half a mile of the ship, and then made a climbing turn in echelon formation and then passed out of sight. The witnesses could not decide if the objects were white or blue. Astoria, Oregon, ASTORIAN-BUDGET 4 Nov.
The Navy oiler, USS Chipola, was returning to the USA from the Persian Gulf. An official log entry revealed a sighting on the 6th of September 1947 at 2140 hours of (unidentified luminous phenomena( seen at 10 degrees above the horizon at an estimated range of less than 5 miles. Two groups of eight bluish, oval shaped objects were seen moving at about 5 knots in speed. They banked away for the ship disappearing in about 8 second. They were observed by the Deck Officer, LTJG R. L. Simmons, and also by Ensign J. B. Farris and CM3 J. A. Wisnienski. Log of the US Navy ship USS Chipola, 6th September, National Archives II, College Park, Maryland
Another account of the two objects trailing of an 11th Bomb Group B-24 from may be found at:
The radar account and the above are both from letters to Project Blue Book was in response to the April 1952 LIFE magazine article, (Have We Visitors from Space.( The personnel at Project Blue Book merely filed them away as (old,( and made no attempt to follow up on the reports. Also, the letters in this file did not become part of the material microfilm at Maxwell Air Force Base or at the National Archives. It is thought that this paper file was probably destroyed and the record exists on microfilm fortuitously rescued in the late 1960's by Dr. Herbert Stentz (then a Ph.D. candidate at the University of Colorado) on a visit to Project Blue Book to gather data on the media reactions to UFOs for his doctoral dissertation. He was given the referenced microfilm with a number of other microfilms which the Project Blue Book staff were about to discard in a house cleaning effort.
STATUS: TBP
*DATE: March and April, 1945 TIME: night CLASS: AR, AV, surface radar
LOCATION: SOURCES: USAF Historical Research Agency microfilm A0827 Night fighter Pacific Theater squadrons histories for World War II.
RADAR DURATION: unspecified
EVALUATION: No official
Added Case: Aldrich
Web Reference:
INITIAL SUMMARY: Extracted from the March 1945 INTELLIGENCE AND OPERATIONS section
of the 549th Night Fighter Squadron Unit History:
"Combat Air Patrols were flown on the 22nd, 24th, 26th, 28th and 30 March. On 26 March Lieutenant Calvin P. Lamb, Pilot, Lieutenant James G. Holmes, Radar Observer, and Sergeant John W. McIsaac, Gunner saw what they described as lights on an airborne object. The lights followed them through a few turns but turned away as the crew orbited north of Iwo Jima. A chase was made, with slight radar contact on the airborne set, and then the object pulled out of sight. The similar lighted object was again seen the next night of patrol by Lieutenant William F. Sill, Pilot, Flight Officer George W. Hayden, Radar Observer, and Private First Class William Brasvell, Gunner."
Some mission reports:
CONFIDENTIAL
FROM: CONITFITERRON FIVE FOUR NINE [hard to read here] 18 April 1945
TO : COMFITERCOM SEVEN
ATTN: A-2
549TH NIGHT FIGHTER SQUADRON MISSION REPORT NUMBER 4-27
1. A. One (1) P-61-B
B. Unknown
2. A. None
B. None
3. Combat Sortie.
4. PILOT: Lt. J. A. Monaghan (Laughing Boy Blue 1)
RADAR OBSERVER: Lt Jack D. Sullivan
GUNNER: Sgt. J. A. Coldren
TAKE-OFF: 0020 LAND: 0400
On patrol at 10,000 feet when gunner saw what appeared to be falling stars at about 0100 and 0140. Both very much higher than the plane about 20 miles north of Iwo. At about 0300, while on practice interception as "Fighter" Ground Controller broke interception and gave vector on faint bogie at 18 miles away then almost immediately at 8 miles away. faint AI contact made and Gunner saw "light" on semi approaching course rapidly losing altitude. It moved rapidly with closing speeds of Blue 1 and bogie between 400 and 600 mph. Blue 1 was indicating 215 mph. Contact was lost and no further AI contact during search orbits. Gunner saw another light on port side but no AI contact could be made. Blue 1 was vectored S of Iwo while blue 2 chased a bogie and then Blue 1 was told to pancake.
5. WEATHER: CAVU COMMUNICATIONS: Good.
6. None
7. No ammo: 700 gallons of gasoline expended.
8. Lights appeared to be yellowish or about like electric lights or stars. Five (5) were seen at different times and gunner thought he saw sparks of a trail behind one. Faint AI contacts were definitely made on two (2) but both contacts were very short.
ARCHIE BEATTLE
1st Lt., Air Corps,
Asst. Intelligence Officer.
CONFIDENTIAL
CONFIDENTIAL
FROM : COMITRITERRON FIVE FOUR NINE 18 April 1945
TO : COMFITERCOM SEVEN
ATTN : A-2
549TH NIGHT FIGHTER SQUADRON MISSION REPORT NUMBER 4-28
1. A. One (1) P-61-B
B. Unknown
2. A. None
B. None
3. Combat Sortie.
4. PILOT: Lt. F. L. Williams (Laughing Boy Blue 2)
RADAR OBSERVER: Lt. J. H. Richardson
GUNNER: Sgt. S. Forman
TAKE-OFF: 0022 LAND: 0415
On routine patrol until 0300 and then on practice interception when GCI reported possible bogie between Blue 1 and Blue 2 but Blue could not make any contact. A little later GCI gave another vector and possible bogie at Angel 2 and AI contact was made at 7 miles. Bogie made normal target on screen and after chase of 5 minutes lost bogie off starboard
side, then picked it up at about 4 miles on port side. Held target at about that distance for a few minutes at speed of 200 mph while bogie took mild evasive action. Finally closed to 2.500 feet when bogie faded to starboard and when it was again picked up it was to the port side at about 3 miles and gaining speed. Bogie increased distance and Blue 2 was forced to abandon chase by shortage of gasoline.
5. WEATHER: 6/10 coverage, tops 3,000, base 2,000 : visibility good.
Communications: Good
6. None.
7. No ammo : 750 gallons of gasoline expended
8. At close range bogie appeared on scope as two (2) blips. Gunner saw reddish round light and correctly reported its movements to R/O who was following it on scope. GCI's report of "possible bogie" confusing as to whether he meant he was uncertain as to contact or as to indentity of contact.
Archie Beattle
1Lt., Air Corps
Asst. Intelligence Officer
CONFIDENTIAL
NOTES: Many reports of Japanese planes at night when chased dropped or deploying (windows( (i.e. aluminum foil strips) which would confuse the radars. The Japanese had sophisticated windows dispensing devices on some of their aircraft. Sometime such deployment of windows will cause the blip to appear to slip into two parts. However, in the case of the Mission 4-28 this does not seem to be the case. (Note the 1947 report of slipping into two returns from ground radar in Japan.) Also, the "bogies" seem to be able to put on much higher speeds to get away from the night fighters. Most Japanese night flight operations around Iwo Jima seemed to be "lurking" intelligence gathering missions. US Pilots reported aircraft like the "Betty" escorting but not firing on bombers making their run on Iwo Jima and the surrounding Islands at night.
A brief history of 549th NFS may be found at:
STATUS: TBP
*DATE: Okinawa TIME: day CLASS: R shipboard radar
Campaign, but no
earlier than Easter, 1945
LOCATION: SOURCES: Keyhoe, TFSC
near Nansei Shoto Dawson, Intervention at Nansei Shoto
in the Ryu Kyu Islands
RADAR DURATION: unspecified
EVALUATION: No official
Case Added: Aldrich
INITIAL SUMMARY: Keyhoe briefly summarized this alleged radar incident in his book, The Flying Saucer Conspiracy. James Dawson, 2617 42nd St., NW, Washington D. C., in a 22-page manuscript reported the incident in more detail, but with some changes of names and places.
CarDiv X[?] consisting four small aircraft carriers was in support of the Battle for Okinawa after the Kamikaze attacks began. Dawson worked in the Combat Information Center (CIC) of one of the aircraft carriers. All aircraft were away supporting the battle. Only 12 F6F Hellcats were available, four in the air on Combat Air Patrol (CAP) and eight in reserve on the decks of the carriers. The weather was clear with 1/10 clouds at 5000 feet visibility for aircrews was 50 miles accord to the weather observations made by the CAP. A very large return was received to the northeast at a distance of 120 miles. Interpretation of the return was that it represented a wave of attacking aircraft numbering 200 to 300 as the US aircraft did not mass in a large formation by returned in small separate groups. Also, returning US planes would not have come from the northeast. The return indicated a speed of 650 knots far beyond an known capability at that time.
At 100 miles two fighters from the CAP were sent to intercept the oncoming mass. Battle stations was sounded and the additional fighters were launched. Four of the fighters were sent to join the original two already on the way to the return.
At 80 miles all fighters were committed to the interception. Interception officers divided them into two groups of six each in case the attack split. At 65 miles the return developed two (arms( which moved around to come in from the north and the south of the ships. The US fighters had been split and instructed to intercept both arms. As the fighters moved towards the oncoming radar contacts their returns merged (?) with the oncoming returns.
Dawson thought the tactics used here were standard Japanese practice in the attack. Split the attack to draw off and dilute the defenders. The US fighters should have now been among the oncoming aircraft, but nothing was seen.
Deciding that the interception was a failure the CIC recalled the F6Fs. Dawson warned the returning fighters that they might encounter friendly fire as they came back. As the arms closed on the ships, the bridge and lookouts reported that nothing was seen. Dawson went outside to view the attack, but saw only the returning fighters take up positions above the ships. No visual contact made. The radar returns were just phantoms.
Dawson said he heard stories of other such incidents. Speculations concerned equipment faults, interference from other radars, or enemy countermeasures. Tokyo Rose, the female commentator who broadcasted Japanese propaganda to the Allies in English, supposedly said that the phenomenon was caused by the departed Japanese ancestors, or spirits of the gloriously killed Japanese airman and seaman coming back to exact vengeance. Both Dawson and Keyhoe implied that these returns might be invisible flying saucers. Dawson implied that a third unidentified source was responsible and showed that it [the third force] could control the situation at will. At the time Dawson wrote his manuscript the Korean war was in progress, and he speculated that this third force might intervene there.
NOTES: Keyhoe(s summary does not exactly agree with Dawson(s, so the later has been used for this presentation. Dawson(s dramatic style resembles Keyhoe(s in many ways. The incident is interspersed with conversations and sensational dramatic presentations and explanations. However, there are numbers of important details left out.
Missing are the identities of the other witnesses involved although last names are used throughout. Dawson used USS Brandywine as his carrier(s name, but this is fictional. It is not yet known if the other carrier mentioned the Schuykill is also fictional. One then wonders if the witnesses mentioned in the commentary are also fictional and if Dawson(s own name is a pseudonym. This is not particularly strange for this time in history. Many military or ex-military felt that it might be necessary to conceal their identity or the identifying details of the such reports as there might still be security considerations involved. However, such omissions or little fictions contributed to the (aura of mystery( and to the idea that there was a multi-level government cover-up of UFO incidents.
It is interesting to note that Dawson does not mention anyone opening fire on the returning F6Fs although the warships that have been under Kamikaze attack for a long period and the possibility of friendly fire was great. Neither does he mention any investigation, or give any idea where such information on where reports on this incident might be found.
Tokyo Rose did indeed comment about Allied deployments, incidents and other information found out by monitoring radio broadcasts, captured documents, and prisoner interrogation. It would be interesting to find out if such comments on this and similar incidents came from such broadcasts.
It has been suggested that this and the following two incidents are emanated from the same person. The chronology of the reports seems to be Wells in 1947, Dawson in late 1951 or early 1952, and the anonymous officer(s report to the Lorenzens( book later.
Other letters to National Investigation Committee on Aerial Phenomena vaguely mention similar incidents and hint at least a high level study by the US Navy. Documents on such a study could still languish among the huge amount of official material currently in storage at various official archives.
Various authors or military histories refer to the (Ghost of Nansei Shoto.( Menzel and Taves (1977) related incidents of US submarines operating near Ryukyu Islands in 1944. Dr. Howard H. Menzel, later director of the Harvard University Astronomical Observatory, was a Commander in the Naval Reserve during World War II and in charge of the Mathematics and Physical Research Section of Naval Communication and also a member and later chairman of the Wave Propagation Committee of the Joint and Combined Chiefs of Staff. Both positions were concerned not only with communication, but also radar.
The submarines had to recharge their batteries which generally required that they surfaced at night to avoid detection by the Japanese. During their time on the surface they used radar to detect a possible attack. One incident involved the detection of one or sometimes more than one radar contact heading directly for the submarine. Evasive actions proved useless as the oncoming contact change course and continued heading for the submarine. Just before the contact closed with submarine it disappeared. Observers on the deck saw nothing of the (galloping ghost( as the phenomenon was dubbed by the crew.
The Wave Propagation Committee worked on a solution for this phenomenon using experiments and theoretical studies. The solution proved to be the trapping of radar waves close to the surface. Sometime this is done by a temperature inversion, the increase in temperature of an air layer as the altitude increase. Normally in the lower atmosphere the temperature decreases with increasing altitude, the opposite effect is call a temperature inversion. Instead of moving out from the radar transmitter and returning directly, the radar pulse is trapped close to the surface, bouncing off objects such as geographical features on land or other ships and possible bouncing off the send ship finally returning to the transmitter giving a false return that does not exist due to the expect equipment range and the expected timing of the returning pulse. Sometimes the radar pulse travels for long distances beyond the expected range of the equipment due to this trapping.
Captain R. D. Risser, U. S. Navy, Retired, Planetarium Director at the Oklahoma Science and Arts Foundation in Oklahoma City described a personal experience in a letter dated 27 August 1965 to Mr. David Halperin, Levittown, Pennsylvania:
(As for radar contacts, I am mindful of the hectic nights I spent during World War II running my submarine all over the East China Sea trying to escape false radar contacts that would close us at astounding rate and then just evaporate! This was in the area around Okinawa, Amami-o-Shima and the weather conditions were unusual with low heavy fog. The best explanation ever made to me was a peculiar trapping of our radar beam along the surface coupled with echoes bouncing off the many small islands in the area. Many others experienced the same things in similar areas and I have seen a number of unexplained radar contacts, both day and night.(
For further explanation of this radar phenomena see the discussion of radar ghost detected by the USS Montrose during the Korean War.
Wonderquest by April Holladay, Science Correspondent, US TODAY
04/24/2002 - Updated 09:17 AM ET
A radar ghost still haunts
See also another version of the Ghost of Nansei Shoto and other radar phenomena detected by the USS Oakland,
see part VI Special Comments and Recommendations
"Ghost of Nansei Shoto".
THE BATTLE OF THE PIPS
Saga of the Flying Saucers
Admiral Recalls How Fleet Pumped Shells into (Ghost( Seen by Radar
WASHINGTON, August 2 [1952]--(INS)--Vice Admiral Robert C. Giffen, who fought the (Battle of the Pips( in World War II, think [sic] the the Air Force thoery of atmospheric reflections offers a likely explation for the (flying saucers.(
(I kow they can look like anything including ships on the water,( Giffen said today of the radar phantoms his fleet encounter off Attu Island in the Aleutians on Jyly 26, 1943.
In the (Battle of the Pips,( Giffen(s fleet fired 518 14 -inch shells and 487 eight-inch shells before it was established that the (enemy( showing on the radar screens was not there in reality.
That was a case, the admiral recalled in which the mistake was compounded by several radar sets since the Battleship Mississippi and Idaho and the Crusisers Wichita and Portland all report getting the same positions for the supposed (enemy.(
Another radar phenomena named the (Battle of the Pips( maybe found in a number of the histories listed below.
USS Mississippi, Battle of the Pips, 27 July 1943
Battle of the Pips, Task Force George and Task Force Gilbert
USS Tennessee, July 1943 Unusual radar contacts
USS Worcester CL-144
In Task Group 95 off the East coast of Korea near Wonson
Oct 16,1950 Worcester, HMS Helena and accompanying destroyers fired on radar contacts coming from the north. There were no visual contact or other confirmation. It was felt that the radar contacts were two flocks of geese.
See also Korean War Diary USS Missouri
From the Buffalo, New York News, 30 July 1952:
Anzio Vets Recall Radar Pick Up (Fleet at Sea(
The story announced that Anzio World War II veterans remembered radar contacts showed what appeared to be a big enemy fleet at sea approaching he Anzio Nettuno area. Allied forces were put on alert and aircraft were sent to met the invaders. However in the area indicated by the radar (blips(, flares dropped by aircraft revealed no vessels. The strange blips were put down to (weather--freak atmospheric conditions.(
STATUS: False returns.
DATE: summer 1945 TIME: unknown CLASS: R shipboard radar
LOCATION: SOURCES: UFOTWS 1969 24
Near Guam,
Western Pacific
RADAR DURATION: unspecified
EVALUATION: No official
PRECIS: A US Navy radar officer who requested anonymity recalled several incidents of unexplained radar returns on his vessel's air search radar in the area between Guam and Saipan during the summer of 1945. Typically they appeared as "large groups" of echoes detected at about 100 miles range on courses inbound towards the ship. Plotted speeds were over 1000 mph. The targets "passed overhead at approximately two thousand feet and showed up on the radar screen as definitely solid objects." Visual lookouts on alert dockside saw nothing, and the radar officer himself on one occasion went on deck to search the sky, but he too saw nothing. He was adamant that the targets were not due to "ionized clouds, inversions, sea gulls, mechanical defects, or any of the other common explanations." The equipment was carefully checked and found to be functioning properly.
NOTES: Statistically speaking, the summer months in a tropical zone 14 degrees from the equator might favour anomalous propagation (AP) conditions, and several of the features described here are characteristic of AP. Others - such as "passing overhead at 2000 feet", which implies an incidence moving close to or through the normal - are perhaps not. But despite the officer's convictions, allowance has to be made for the fact that these incidents were apparently recalled some years after the event and details may be unreliable. Furthermore, radar theory was very much in its infancy in 1945, and it is doubtful that even an experienced operator would have been familiar with many of the vagaries of anomalous propagation which, at the time, were the subject of intense allied research under the direction of the Wave Propagation Committees of the US Joint and Combined Chiefs of Staff. Some of the fundamentals of radio ducting were coming to be understood, but mechanisms such as scattering from winddriven waves on an inversion surface, insect "angels" and the dielectric properties of clear air turbulence were not fully described until the mid 'fifties or even later. Many examples of such radar ghosts in the AP-prone atmosphere of the Far East theatre are known to have been studied by Naval Operations during and after the war, and the likelihood is that the "solid although invisible objects" reported here fall in the AP category.
STATUS: Anomalous propagation
*DATE: summer 1945 TIME: about 1100 a. m. CLASS: R shipboard radar
LOCATION: SOURCES: St Petersburg (Florida) Times 6 July 1947
South of Okinawa
RADAR DURATION: unspecified
EVALUATION: No official
Case Added: Aldrich
INITIAL SUMMARY: Extract from the St. Petersburg, Florida TIMES, Sunday, July 6, 1947, page 29.
STRANGE OBJECT ON RADAR MAY HAVE SEEN (SAUCER(
Now comes a former naval officer to report a queer thing he saw on a radar screen in the Pacific during the summer of 1945.
E. L. Wells, Magnolia Hotel, then Lt. j.g. aboard the Salamana (CVE 96), an escort aircraft carrier, was interception officer. Around 11 o(clock in the morning, while south of Okinawa, he said he and his group were disturbed by the appearance of a (blip( on the screen that appeared to be traveling toward them at a terrific rate of speed.
(Of course we couldn(t distinguish any shape but the object was estimated to be traveling at about 1,000 miles an hour,( Wells said.
(It was moving on a course of zero one zero, coming in from the direction of Formosa and traveling towards Japan. We thought at first it was a Baka bomb but it was too fast for that.
(We just braced ourselves and waited for it to hit. Then, after tracking it to just a few miles from the ship, as the radar made another sweep, we lost it.
(We never heard another thing about it but we wondered a lot what it was. Now, with all these stories about flying saucer, (it) made me thing of it again and I wondered if anybody ever had seen those saucers on a radar screen....That would tell quite a lot about them.(
NOTES: (A baka bomb( refers to Japanese suicide aircraft. See:
STATUS: Anomalous propagation
*DATE: July 15, 1945 TIME: 1200 local CLASS: R/V ground radar/air visual
LOCATION: SOURCES: MUJ 344
Hanford, Washington
RADAR DURATION: unspecified
EVALUATIONS: No official
Added Case: Aldrich
Web Reference: NICAP Page
INITIAL SUMMARY: Huge red object at an estimated altitude of 20 km. Six F6F aircraft dispatched to check on object could not reach it.
NOTES: An interesting fragment found in the NICAP file now at CUFOS:
(In the latter part of December 1944 and January and February of 1945, Radar operators at the Naval Air Station, Pasco, Wn. reported unusual blips appearing out of nowhere and proceeded from Northwest of the Air Station t the Southwest and consequently off of the radar screen. A fighter pilot was made available with an armed F6F fighter and given orders to shoot down anything that appeared to be hostile. He was vectored out on two occasions that this writer remembers, but, in each instance made no contact. The blips always acted much like a Piper Cub aircraft and at about the same speed. The writer was vectored out one afternoon in an SNJ aircraft to make contact with one of these blips. This particular one appeared to be very high according to the radar operators report two blips on the screen. The writer is convinced that there was something there, but, the mystery as to what it was will apparently never be answered.
Cdr. R. W. Hendershott, USNR
2364 E. 90th
Seattle 15, Wash.
Can it be established that there any radar coverage of Hanford during this period in 1945? Much of the air defense had been previously dismantled in 1944. But the start of the Japanese Fugo Balloon Bomb attack caused a hurried reassembled of an ad hoc air defense and spotting network.
STATUS: TBP
DATE: February 1, 1946 TIME: 2:25 p. m. CLASS: R/ground
LOCATION: SOURCES: Philadelphia Enquirer 2 Feb 1946
40 miles Southwest of
Philadelphia, near
Bridgeton, New Jersey
RADAR DURATION: Unknown
EVALUATION: None
Case Added: Aldrich
INITIAL SUMMARY: An unidentified object in the air (approximately over Bridgeton, N. J. about 40 miles southwest of Philadelphia (bounced back a radar echo( at 2:25 p. m. causing an alarm. Flying boats went sent to investigate and determine what it was. (Nothing found.( Officers pointed out an unusual close formation [of birds?] or other natural phenomena might have been responsible.
NOTES: Loren Gross notes that this is one of the first uses of (unidentified( with the word object. It would seem likely that an official report of this incident would exist somewhere.
STATUS: Insufficient information.
DATE: May-October 1946 TIME: N/A CLASS: General
LOCATION: SOURCES: Good ATS 1987 23
Sweden Liljegren & Svahn, UFO47-87 36-7
RADAR DURATION: N/A
EVALUATION: Swedish General Staff - probable foreign missile tests
PRECIS: From the New York Times, October 11 1946:
Swedish military authorities said today that they had been unable to discover after four months of investigation the origin or nature of the ghost rockets that have been flying over Sweden since May. A special communique declared that 80 per cent of 1000 reports on the rockets could be attributed to 'celestial phenomena' but that radar had detected some [200] objects 'which cannot be the phenomena of nature or products of the imagination, nor can be referred to as Swedish airplanes.'
The report added, however, that the objects were not the V-type bombs used by the Germans in the closing days of the war.
The Swedish Air Force had some 30 fixed and mobile radar units at this time, based on British sets purchased in 1944. Liljegren & Svahn cite several instances of unknown targets recorded in the "ghost rocket" file of the Swedish War Archives. The fixed radars allocated to each Air Force wing were up and running from mid-July, but could only be used for a few hours each day due to a shortage of experienced operators. L & S list four incidents during July and seven over a four-day period from August 19-22. One of these incidents, at Air Force Wing F1, at Vasteras on August 20, was
concurrent with a visual sighting of a "vague luminous phenomenon." Truck-mounted radars recorded unknown targets on several occasions. According to L & S several events appear to have been due to returns from birds: on one occasion in November radar detected a large target landing on the island of Ottenby on oland, which was determined by Air Force analysts to have been a flock of birds.
NOTES: The radars involved were AMES [Air Ministry Experimental Station] Type 6 Mk III. These were almost certainly metric (VHF) instruments, and this is not an optimum wavelength for the detection of small targets such as birds - even though probably the first identification of a single bird echo was made on an experimental 200 MHZ shipboard radar in 1939. Detection of flocks would be quite likely, however, and the resolution would be poor leading to integrated returns resembling those from an object with a large radar cross-section. There is no reason to doubt the Swedish analysis in the November case.
The visual sighting of a "vague" luminous phenomenon during the radar contact at Vasteras is interesting. Vasteras is less than 500 miles south of the Arctic Circle, at a latitude where longer-wavelength radar returns from auroral ionisation are quite possible. At wavelengths of a meter or more auroral cross-sections can be hundreds or thousands of square meters, and would present as either diffuse or point targets in the northern scope sector for periods ranging from minutes to hours. It is quite likely that the Air Force operators would be innocent of such effects in 1946 - the more so if, as is implied, some were inexperienced - and since they would not anticipate the familiar Northern Lights to register on radar, an unusual auroral structure might easily be reported as a strange luminous phenomenon. (This hypothesis is speculative, however, and more information is required to test it.) It may also be relevant to point out that radar units appear to have been alerted to report targets in connection with the "ghost rocket" investigations, and so would have been sensitized to all kinds of unusual radar indications which in other circumstances might pass unnoticed.
In conclusion, the sparse information available on a handful of cases does not suggest any convincing evidence of radar detection of the "ghost rockets". However, it is reasonable to add the caveat that this is a minute proportion of the 200 radar incidents officially declared.
STATUS: Insufficient information
DATE: January 16 1947 TIME: 2230 local CLASS: R ground/air radar
LOCATION: SOURCES: Fawcett & Greenwood 151
North Sea/Norfolk
UK
RADAR DURATION: 30 minutes
EVALUATIONS: Blue Book: AP
Web Presence:
PRECIS: The following message was forwarded to the FBI from the US Army Air Force in 1947 pursuant to a request for investigative assistance in the matter of UFO reports made to the Bureau by Army Air Corps Intelligence in July. From the British Air Ministry, it is evidently a reply to a US query dated July 29 1947:
FROM: A. M. LONDON
TO: FAFDEL [acronym uncertain]
AIX 6328 Aug. 8th 1947
Your AIX 14 July 29th
During normal night flying practice at 2230 on 16th January, 1947, one of our Mosquitos was vectored on to an unidentified aircraft at 22,000 feet. A long chase ensued commencing over the North Sea about 50 miles from the Dutch coast and ending at 2300 hours over Norfolk. Two brief AI contacts were made but faded quickly. The unidentified aircraft appeared to take efficient controlled evasive action.
No explanation of this incident has been forthcoming nor has it been repeated.
NOTES: It is possible that the ground radar involved here was at Neatishead, Norfolk, which was established as a Sector Operations Center in the revamped Chain Home coastal radar network in 1946. Other SOCs, such as Trimley Heath near Felixstowe in Suffolk, are possible participants, but the terminal phase of the chase over Norfolk suggests the involvement at least of Neatishead. (Neatishead, after hardening against nuclear strike and the installation of Marconi centimetric radars in the period 1951-5, was to figure prominently in the Lakenheath radar-visual events of 1956. See file.) Some weight has to be given to the fact that "no explanation" could be found by UK authorities, and despite the inadequacies of the report it is by no means obvious that this was due to the incomplete understanding of radar propagation anomalies in 1947.
The report is too sketchy for detailed analysis, but some observations can be made. The interception control radar in use in 1947 would have been the metric AMES Type 7 200 MHZ radar which was still an element of the augmented GCI system in 1956. AI radar in the Mosquito in 1947 was the Mk.10, a 9 cm. helical-scan instrument. Thus ground and airborne radars had totally dissimilar wavelengths and pulse-repetition frequencies (250 & 1500 pps respectively) which makes certain explanations (mutual interference and anomalous propagation) unattractive. But it is true that, for example, targets caused by partial reflection from moving waves on an inversion layer would not have been recognised in 1947 as the theory behind this effect was not fully developed until 1953.
Such a reflection could have been displayed by ground radar as a moving point target on the PPI. However there are several objections to this hypothesis: 1) Reflectivity of scattering layers is inversely related to wavelength with peak efficiency occurring at about 5 cm, and a strong signal comparable to that from an aircraft would be improbable at metric wavelengths used by the Type 7; 2) The Type 7 was in fact an early 3-D system, switchable for height finding by comparing the signal amplitudes returned directly from the target with those returned via ground-reflected vertical lobing. Even a PPI echo from a scattering layer, at optimum wavelength, requires the radar energy to be incident on the layer at a grazing angle: Height indication via a signal that would be attenuated by a) being doubly reflected and b) incident on the layer at an angle nearer the normal than the direct signal implies an efficient reflection still less consistent with the unfavourable wavelength. 3) Partial reflection echoes would display as targets moving at twice the windspeed at the layer and at twice its altitude, so that a target at 22,000' covering the roughly 100 miles from acquisition to signal loss over Norfolk in less than 30 minutes at a displayed speed therefore of >200 mph would correspond to easterly winds of >100 mph at 11,000', and these conditions are improbable over southern England in July; 4) this mechanism offers no plausible explanation of the concurrent AI radar contacts and cannot explain target motions which would be described by the phrase "efficient controlled evasive action."
Direct specular returns due to very efficient back-scattering from dielectric discontinuities associated with clear air turbulence, possibly occurring in quite localised domains, are now thought to be detectable by sensitive radars; but the peak power of the Type 7 was only about 500 kW, an order of magnitude lower than the powers of modern search/GCI radars which may be capable of detecting such effects in extreme conditions (normally only ultrasensitive research instruments would encounter them), and once again the wavelength is inappropriate. Furthermore such wind-dependent phenomena could not explain the displayed speed.
Neither birds, insects, balloons nor other windborne objects can explain such a target. Multiple-trip effects can only reduce the displayed speeds of targets detected beyond the unambiguous range of the set and are thus unhelpful. Sidelobe returns likewise offer no useful explanation. A "ghost" reflection from the Mosquito would appear on the same azimuth as the aircraft and at greater range proportional to the added trip-time to a secondary reflector and back, and it would not be possible for the aircraft to "pursue" its own ghost inbound towards the radar site. Once again, the two AI contacts reported by the interceptor are unexplained by any such mechanism.
The most likely cause of such a target is an aircraft, presumably a military aircraft capable of outperforming a Mosquito and one which declined to identify itself when (inevitably) challenged by radio. Such "tickling" of coastal radar defences by Soviet reconnaissance platforms became a common feature of the Cold War. It is worth noting, however, that this "unidentified aircraft" was pursued inbound to Norfolk and lost well within UK airspace, which would be brazen recklessness for any normal foreign intruder. If it were a friendly RAF fighter, intercepted due to some flight-plan mix-up, perhaps with a broken radio, its pilot believing the Mosquito to be a hostile intruder, then one would expect this misunderstanding to have been cleared up quite quickly - if not by the Mosquito pilot following him down then certainly from Operations records. Yet seven months later the Air Ministry still logged the incident as unexplained.
This is possibly the earliest record of an unexplained ground-air radar target being categorised as a possible "flying disc" (by US Army Air Corps Intelligence, not necessarily by the UK Air Ministry), which was the term widely used in US official circles at the date the above message was prepared. The incident itself predates the Arnold incident and the coining of the term "flying saucer" by more than four months, and at the time no such category was available. Therefore it was an "unidentified aircraft". This fact exposes the danger of adopting mind-sets defined by inherited labels and their collateral assumptions. "Unidentified Flying Object" is, semantically, a more objective label for such an event than "unidentified aircraft", but the social history of the problem ensures that the assumptive baggage of the term, and its emotive potential for confusion, are magnified out of proportion to the openness to scientific possibility which it offers. With this caveat in mind, the report should probably be carried as an unknown.
Aldrich: Some information on the (Ghost Aeroplanes( leaked out at the end of April and first few days of May and was carried in both the US and UK press. (The same news reports were again repeated in July 1947 mostly in American weekly newspaper as a special little feature.) Some news stories may be found indexed at:
One of the last reports on the subject carried an official denial of that anything unusual had taken place.
London Daily Telegraph, 2 May 1947
PLANE REPORTS DENIED
After investigating reports that an unidentified aircraft has been flying at night over East Anglian sea areas, the Air Ministry is taking no further action in the matter. "We have found no evidence to support the reports at all," an official the Ministry stated yesterday. Investigations followed reports by radar operators of some unusual plots on their screens.
Dr. David Clarke in his article on Operation Charlie suggests that a full report on this incident probably existed in UK record, but was likely destroyed as has most of the UFO material prior to the mid-1960s. Clarke also suggested that a copy of such a report might exist in US files. In reviewing both the Project SIGN and Project Blue Book microfilms no such report was found. However, the summary below might well have come from such a report:
UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT SUMMARY
SUMMARY AND EXTRACT REPORT
UFOB REPORT # 00009
SUMMARY OF INCIDENT: Nick-named "Ghost Plane" by the RAF this UFO was tracked on 3 separate occasions by RAF grd radar stations during 16-17 Jan 1947. The first object tracked proceeded at 120 mph; was later identified by Fighter Interceptors as another a/c - OXFORD. The next incident involved a fighter attempting to intercept a track and when the fighter closed the object took violent evasive action. The next track was clocked at 400-450 mph at initially 19,000'. proceeded E and gained in alt to 44,000. Fighter then scrambled, chased target which had descended to 15,000 and was falling rapidly. The fighter lost contact.
INVESTIGATIVE EFFORTS: Attempted A/I on these objects were unsuccessful. At no time were these objects seen visually. [all underlined.]
FINAL ATIC EVALUATION: Poss. Temp Inversion.
This incident is further mention in connect with the Top Secret intelligence estimate prepared at TID in 1948. Here is a quote from Edward Ruppelt(s original unedited manuscript on the report.
([ ] indicate the portion of the manuscript text which was edited out before the book was published. < > are used for editorial comment and clarification.)
(In intelligence, if you have something to say about some vital problem you write a report that is known as an
(Estimate of the Situation.( A few day after the DC-3 was (buzzed(, the people at ATIC The situation was the UFO:
the estimate was they were interplanetary.
(It was a rather thick document with a black cover and it was printed on legal size paper. Stamped across the
front were the words TOP SECRET.
(It contained the Air Force(s analysis of may of the incidents which I have told you about plus many other similar
ones. All of them had come from scientists, pilots or other equally as credible observers and each was an (unknown.(
[(It was a rather thick document, in a black cover, and on legal sized paper. It was classified TOP SECRET. It
concluded that UFO(s were interplanetary. As documented proof, many unexplained sightings were quoted. The
original UFO sighting by Kenneth Arnold; the series of sightings from the secret Air Force Test Center, Muroc AFB;
the report of an F-80 pilot who saw two round objects diving toward the Grand Canyon; and a report by the pilot of
an Idaho National Guard T-6 trainer, who saw a violently maneuvering black object.
[(As further documentation, the report quoted an interview with an Air Force Major from Rapid City AFB
(now Ellsworth AFB) who saw twelve UFO(s flying a tight formation. When he first saw them they were high
but soon they went into a fantastically high speed dive, leveled out, made a perfect formation turn, and climbed
at a 30 to 35 degree angel, accelerating all the time. The UFO(s were oval-shaped and brilliant yellowish-white.
[(Also included was one of the reports from the AEC(s Los Alamos Laboratory. The incident occurred at
9:40 AM on September 23, 1948. A group of people were waiting for an airplane at the landing strip in Los
Alamos when one of them noticed something glint in the sun. It was a flat, circular object, high in the northern
sky. The appearance and relative size was the same as a dime held edgewise and slightly tipped, about 30 feet away.(]
(The document pointed of that the reports hadn(t actually started with the Arnold incident. Delayed reports
from a weather observer in Richmond, Virginia, who observed a (silver disk( through his theodolite; an F-47 pilot, and three pilots in his formation, who saw a (silver flying wing(; and the English (ghost airplanes( that had been picked up on radar early in 1947, proved this point. Although not received until after the Arnold sighting they all had taken place earlier.
(When the Estimate was completed, typed, and approved, it started up thought channels to higher command echelons. It drew considerable comment but no one stopped it on its way up.(
STATUS: Unknown
*DATE: July 1, 1947 TIME: CLASS: R/ ground radar
LOCATION: SOURCES: AIR 203
Hokkaido AF Intel Reports
Japan Air Intelligence Reports
RADAR DURATION: 10 minutes overall
EVALUATIONS: Project SIGN - unknown
Air Intelligence Division, HQ USAF Intel/Office of Naval Intelligence--unknown/Soviet aircraft,
Defensive Air Branch, Air Intel Div, HQ USAF Intel - Possible Soviet photographic mission
FEAF - Soviet Aircraft
Case Added: Aldrich
Web Reference: AIR 203
page 15
( a. On 1 July 1947, a GCA radar at Hacked, Japan picked up an unidentified target at 16 miles, with a speed in excess of 500 mph. This target split into two targets, each estimated to be larger than a P-51.(
INITIAL SUMMARY: Extract from 8 August 1947 MEMORANDUM FOR THE COMMANDING GENERAL, ARMY AIR FORCES from Major General George McDonald, Assistant Chief of Air Staff-2 [Intelligence], Subject: Top Secret Supplement to Daily Activity Report - ACAS-2. TS Control # 2-258,
(TS) II. ITEM OF CURRENT INTELLIGENCE INTEREST
The following information from the Far East Command Teletype Conference, 7 August 1947, is supplementary to a previous item of interest. On 1 July 1947 a GCA operator at Chitose AAB, Hacked, reported that a target traveling at a speed in excess of 600 mph was observed and further that the target made four turns on the scope. The radius of the turns was one and one-half miles. The Target heading when contacted was 100 degrees at range of 16 miles north of Chitose AAB. The target made a 180 degree turn to a heading of 0 (zero) degrees and remained on this heading to a range of 28 miles. At this point the target turned to the left to a heading of 240 degrees and traveled for a distance of 6 miles. It then made a 180 degree turn to a heading of 60 degrees. On this 60 degree heading the target returned to its original point 28 miles north of the Chitose base turned to a heading of 0 (zero) degrees and traveled out of range.
(Evaluation: A-1; Completely reliable - Confirmed by other sources.)
A-2 COMMENT: This observation of target maneuvers establishes with certainly that the target is not a weather or other natural phenomenon as we now know natural phenomena. The only objects that could fit the observed facts are aircraft.
Any aircraft traveling at this speed would have to jet-propelled fighter type since there are no known bombers that could operate at this speed. One type of U. S. S. R. Jet fighter has an estimated speed of 525 knots (605 miles per
hour).
(Maj Farrier -- Ext 71095)
Extract from (Air Intelligence Reports( for January 1948, the publication of the Air Defense Command, page (7 of E(:
[Far East Air Force (FEAF) comment:] (....A radar sighting of an unidentified high speed target was made by the GCA station at Chitose AAB on 1 July 1947.
(If assessment of this sighting [Fukuoka 26 August 1947] as a possible Soviet jet aircraft is correct the location of the sighting would make North Korea its most logical base. The only report received which might indicate the basing of Soviet high speed aircraft in North Korea is an F-3 report of a new type Soviet aircraft observed at Haeju airfield. In the case of the Chitose sighting, southern Sakhalin was considered to be the target(s most logical base.(
NOTES: The Defensive Air Branch, Air Intelligence Division, HQ USAF Intelligence in Memorandum for the Assistant Chief of Staff - 2, Subject: Radar Pick-ups of High Speed Targets in the Far East, dated 26 September 1947 concluded that this sighting might be Soviet aircraft on a photographic mission.
STATUS: TBP
*DATE: August 26, 1947 TIME: local CLASS: R/ground radar
LOCATION: SOURCES: Air Defense Command, Air Intelligence Reports, Jan. 1948
Fukuoka Air Intelligence Reports
Japan
RADAR DURATION:
(6 separate episodes)
EVALUATIONS: Project SIGN - no explanation
Air Intelligence Division, HQ USAF Intel/Office of Naval Intelligence--unknown/Soviet aircraft,
Defensive Air Branch, Air Intel Div, HQ USAF Intel - Possible Soviet photographic mission
FEAF - Soviet Jet Aircraft
Air Intelligence Report serial number: KO-89816, KO-91052
Added Case: Aldrich
INITIAL SUMMARY: Extract from (Air Intelligence Reports( January 1948, published by the Air Defense Command, page 6-7 of (E(:
POSSIBLE SOVIET JET AIRCRAFT RADAR SIGHTINGS
Report of a radar sighting of a high speed (480 mph) unidentified target, on 28 August 1947 by Fukuoka M-E-W radar station.
On 28 August 1947 at 1640 Item time Radar Station No. 1 sighted and plotted an unidentified aircraft moving at an estimated speed of 450-480 mph. Target orbited several times 30 to 35 miles out a heading of 20-30 degrees from the station; then headed out on 23 degrees course, fading at 62 miles.
Weather at time of sighting was broken overcast, 1000-1500 foot ceiling.
Altitude was not determined nor were fighters alerted, due to short duration of plot. Aircraft was first picked up on low beam, indicating that it was at 1500 feet or below; then appeared distinctly on high beam on its outward track.
The above information is evaluated A-2, as the radar team operating at the time of the incident is considered to have a high level of experience and skill.
FEAF COMMENT
Radio report was furnished assessing the observation as a possible Soviet jet aircraft.
Observation was made on an AN/CPS-1 set.
No confirming reports of this sighting have been received from any other source. A radar sighting of an unidentified high speed target was made by the GCA station at Chitose AAB on 1 July 1947.
If assessment of this sighting [Fukuoka 26 August 1947] as a possible Soviet jet aircraft is correct the location of the sighting would make North Korea its most logical base. The only report received which might indicate the basing of Soviet high speed aircraft in North Korea is an F-3 report of a new type Soviet aircraft observed at Haeju airfield. In the case of the Chitose sighting, southern Sakhalin was considered to be the target(s most logical base.
KO 91052 Not Evaluated Secret
NOTES: The Defensive Air Branch, Air Intelligence Division, HQ USAF Intelligence in Memorandum for the Assistant Chief of Staff - 2, Subject: Radar Pick-ups of High Speed Targets in the Far East, dated 26 September 1947 concluded that this sighting might be Soviet jet as it was believed at the time that the Soviet aircraft had sufficient performance to exhibit the characteristics reported.
STATUS: TBP
*DATE: Late August, 1947 TIME: Daylight CLASS: R/ ground radar
LOCATION: SOURCES: Case 84 from Project Blue Book files at National Archives
Holloman Air Force Base,
Alamogrodo, New Mexico
RADAR DURATION:
EVALUATIONS: Project Blue Book - (Other) False Returns
Project Blue Case # 84
Case Added: Aldrich
INITIAL SUMMARY: Holloman case file from the Project Blue Book records contains little useful information on radar UFO trackings however from the historical point of view it reveals much about the workings of early UFO investigation by the official USAF project, Project SIGN, which was located at and staff by the Technical Intelligence Division (TID) of Air Materiel Command at Wight Field, Dayton, Ohio.
A Mr Zabriski of TID gave Project SIGN a lead concerning Dr. J. W. People of the Watson Laboratories who Zabriski thought had observed UFOs on radar. Dr. People(s had been temporarily assigned to Holloman Air Force Base in New Mexico. After a TID sent a message to the Command Office of Holloman requesting an interview with Dr. Peoples, Lt. Col James C. Beam and Alfred C. Loedding, both of TID, were dispatched to Holloman Air Force Base to obtain data on possible radar contacts with UFO at the base.
Report of Trip to Holloman Air Force Base, 5 - 6 May 1948 [Excerpt]
1. The primary purpose of this trip was to interview Dr. Peoples representing the Watson Labroratories, who was temporarily on loan to Holloman Air Force Base. Upon arrival, it was learned that Dr.Peoples had returned to the Watson Laboratories at Red Bank, N. J. A teletype sent from Holloman Air Force Base stating that Dr. Peoples would not be available for interview it not reach Hq, AMC in sufficient time to postpone the visit. However, it was learned that Dr. Peoples would be at Maxwell Air Force Base, Montgomery, Ala. on or about 11 May 1948 for an indefinite period of time.
2. A civilian, Mr. Joseph Olsen, who works in the same laboratory with Dr. Peoples had also seen the unidentified flying object while in the presence of Dr. Peoples. Mr. Olsen was interviewed with the following results(
a. The object definitely was not a balloon.
b. The object appeared round and white; was at a great altitude and moved at at high rate of speed.
3. Mr. Olsen promised to send in a detailed report through channels, together with the report of another civilian who also witnessed the phenomenon.
4. It was also learned that a Lt Markley who works in the Radar Laboratory at Holloman AF Base has, on several occasions in the past, witnessed on his scope unidentified flying objects at high alititudes, moving at a very high rate of speed. Lt Markley was not available for interview; however, a request for a detailed report of these observations was forwarded to the Commanding Officer, Holloman Air Force Base.
The following was prepared in response to a letter from Col. W. R. Clinerman, Chief of the Technical Intelligence Divison of the Air Materiel Command(s Intelligence Department to the Commanding Officer of Holloman asking for assistance in obtaining radar scope contacts of unidentified flying objects by Lt. Markley for Project SIGN. As shown above the letter was dated 12 May 1948 and resulted from leads given to
MCM/ctd
HOLLOMAN AIR FORCE BASE
ALAMOGORDO, NEW MEXICO
OPERATIONS & PRODUCTS
ELECTRONIC & ATMOSPHERIC DIVISION
S-T-A-T-E-M-E-N-T
1. Referenced is made to Par 2, basic communication. Apparently a misunderstanding exist in that I did not personnally see unidentified objects moving at an excessive rate of speed on a radar scope. Rather, Mr. P. Rosmovski, of Watson Laboratories, very probably saw unidentified object. However, Mr. Rosmovski that the objects were sen not moving at an excessive speed, but rather were motionless at an alittude somewhere in the vicinity of 200 miles. When these were seen on the Radar scope of the CPS-4 (Modified) the angle of the evelvation of the Radar antenna was approximately 70 degrees from horizontal.
2. During the latter part of August, 1947, this organization was carrying on several test runs with a modified SCR-270 at this base. I had released a corner reflector and two balloons and was watching them in their flight as they drifted to the southeast from this base. While watching the balloon through a pair of ten power binoculars, a white object, appearing to be round, came into my field of vision. I followed the object as far as possible at an unprecedented rate of speed and appeared to be several thousands feet over the top of the Sacramento mountain range, traveling in horizontal flight south to north.
3. There have been other times whend manning the M-2 Optical tracker, that I have seen round or flat-round objects that were unexplainable.
4. In view of Par 1, this indorsement, it is suggested that Mr. P. Rosmovski of the Radar Laboratory, AMC Watson Laboratories, Red Bank, New Jersey be contacted.
/s/ Robert G. Markley
ROBERT G. MARKLEY
1st Lt. USAF
Communication Officer
During a trip to Watson Laboratories on 3 and 4 June 1948 Lt. Col. Beam and probably Alfred Loedding interviewed Mr. P. Rosmovski with the following results:
( 8. Mr. Rosmovski of the Radar Laboratory was interviewed on 4 June 1948. His statements do not ckeck very closely with those conatined in Lt. Markley(s report to this office. Mr. Rosmovski stated that lt. Markley was one of two observers on the modified CPS-4 Optical Traking Device.[sic] The observations Lt. Markley reported seeing on this is equipment could not be confirmed by the other tracker. Mr. Rosmovski passed off the (ghost pip( he personally observed on the radar equipment as merely an illusion of the equipment. He explained that this (ghost( did not move, and was possibly the echo from a distant mountain on a side wave of the radar equipment. He also spoke of (crazing( which is the effect on radar by the white gypsum sand in the area directly west of the Air Base. He also mentioned another form of (ghost( called (Angels( which have been detected and which are believed to be caused by changes in air density. Such phenomenon have benn observed and report from Camp Edwards.(
NOTES: A complete copy of Incident #84 without redactions was obtained as the result of a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) Request in 1992. The files has most of the documents mentioned above. Trip reports to to Holloman Air Force Base, 5 to 6 May 1948 and to Watson Laboratories, 3 to 4 June 1948 ( an apparently more substantive report) exist only in fragments in this file. References in the files indicate several UFO sightings were made, however, in none of these cases listed below were substanative statements, questionaires, or complete follow-up investigations executed:
1) 1LT Markley(s sighting on the August 1947 of a white speedy object which appeared to be over the Scaramento mountain range. (A follow up investigation would as a minimun try to determine the date from test records, location of observor, approximate azimuth and elevation angles to the objects and other data for the possible observation date from Holloman AFB test records.) (1LT Markley(s statement approximate 24 May 1948.)
2) Details on other sightings by 1LT Markley while manning the M-2 Optical tracker. Again, approximate dates and behavior of the objects sighted should have been sought. (1LT Markley(s statement approximate 24 May 1948.)
3) The follow up statement by Mr. Joseph Olsen and another witness to the same phenomenon promised in the interview conducted by Loedding and LTC Beam. The trip report mentions scant details and has no indication as to date. (Report of Trip to Holloman Air Force Base, 5 - 6 May 1948)
4) A fragment of a report mentioned in an interview conducted with Dr. Peoples involving three balloon observers of objects described as having (a round, indistinct form and disappeared suddenly rather than faded away in the distance.(
*DATE: September 16, 1947 TIME: 2305 local CLASS: R/ air radar
LOCATION: SOURCES: AIR 203
Fukuoka Air Defense Command, Air Intelligence Reports, Jan. 1948
Japan Air Intelligence reports
AIR 203
RADAR DURATION: 10 minutes overall
(6 separate episodes)
EVALUATIONS: Project SIGN - no explanation
Air Intelligence Division, HQ USAF Intel/Office of Naval Intelligence--unknown/Soviet aircraft,
Defensive Air Branch, Air Intel Div, HQ USAF Intel - Possible Soviet photographic mission
FEAF - Possible Soviet Rocket (however this was felt very unlikely.)
Air Intelligence Report serial number: KO-94297
Added Case: Aldrich
Web Reference: AIR 203
page 15
b. On 16 September 1947, an MEW radar at Fukuoka, Japan, picked up a target at 89 miles and trailed it to 19 miles, where it faded. Speed was 840-900 mph. The speed measurement, made by a good crew through a 70-mile track, is believed accurate.
INITIAL SUMMARY: Extract from the Air Defense Command(s (Air Intelligence Reports( January 1948, page 7-8 of (E(:
Fukuoka M-E-W Radar Site No. 1 (33-41N, 130-18E) reported detection of an unidentified target at approximately
1230/I, 16 September 1947. The target was estimated to be traveling between 840 and 900 mph, altitude 10,000 to 20,000 ft. It was originally picked up at 98 miles 40 degrees from radar site; first plot made at 89 miles 40 degrees, and carried to 19 miles 45 degrees. Target plotted within 13 miles of Northwest Airlines flight No..841. Four to six identified aircraft were in the scope coincidentally with the target and were plotted at normal speeds. Controller is reported of superior ability, and scope readers as good with average or better intelligence.
Assessment given the incident by the Air Defense Section of this Headquarters [FEAF] is that (It is possible that the explanation of such targets lies in the field of radiation phenomena, with particular regard to dual reflection transmission paths.(
COMMENTS
Subsequent investigation by this Headquarters established the following additional information:
......Interrogation of Northwest Airlines crew was negative.
......Weather: Cloud bases 2,000 to 5,000 ft., scattered to broken (.4 to .6) during the morning becoming broken to overcast during the afternoon; visibility never less than 6 miles; winds aloft; 50 knots from 30 degrees in the morning, 25 to 30 knots from 330 degrees in the afternoon.
.......Target was tracked through entire course on low beam of AN/CPS-1.
KO 94297 B-2 Secret
NOTES: Air Intelligence Report also ran this unattributed press report on the Japanese radar trackings. It is interesting that most of the information on these incidents was classified Secret or Top Secret, but that the story still reached the press.
RADAR TRACKING
Army Radar stations in Japan have been tracking fast planes through the skies over Northern Japan on overcast days -- they aren(t U.S. planes. Presumption is that the Russians are using them to map the territory by radarscope.
The Defensive Air Branch, Air Intelligence Division, HQ USAF Intelligence in Memorandum for the Assistant Chief of Staff - 2, Subject: Radar Pick-ups of High Speed Targets in the Far East, dated 26 September 1947 could not come up with a satisfactory explanation for this incident. The speed was excessive for the this time period, and it was felt that the object might be a rocket, however the length of time of the object was seen on the radar scope seemed to rule out this possibility
STATUS: TBP
*DATE: September 19, 1947 TIME: 5:30 p. m. CLASS: R/ ground radar
LOCATION: SOURCES: Houston Post, 19 Sep 50
Houston, Texas
RADAR DURATION: less then one minute
EVALUATIONS: No official evaluation
Case Added: Aldrich
(Other puzzling accounts turn up unexpectedly. The Houston Press, 24 March, 1950, told of a radar sighting of a high-speed object by Humble Oil and Refining Company at Houston, Texas. The radar was destined for installation at a company facility in Louisiana. A Humble geophysicist was testing a radar used to detect bad weather on 19 September, 1947 at 5:30 p.m. A fast-moving object was detected for less than one minute heading in a southwesterly direction. The speed was about 1500 feet per second or more than 1000 miles an hour. The observation was recorded in a notebook and discussed with other company scientists. Several explanations were considered including a meteor, or a radar ghost caused by unusual atmospheric conditions. The scientists, however, did not report the matter to management at the time. No visual sighting was made. When another UFO wave occurred in 1950, this earlier report was remembered and reported. Several other radar-only sightings were also made in the latter part of 1947 at military installations in Japan.(
NOTES: Attempts to find visual sightings around Houston, Texas in the local press met with negative results.
STATUS: TBP
*DATE: April 10, 1948 TIME: 2305 local CLASS: R/ground radar
LOCATION: SOURCES: Air Intelligence Reports, Volume II, #5, p. 7 of (C(
Shemya Air Force Base,
Alaska
RADAR DURATION: two observations : 12 hours and 22 minutes and
13 minutes
EVALUATIONS: No official evaluation
Air Intelligence Report serial number: KK-19507 (not obtained yet)
Added Case: Aldrich
INITIAL SUMMARY: In the Air Defense Command(s (Air Intelligence Reports( Volume II, Number 5 for May 1948 we find under the title of (Intelligence Reports of Interest( subheaded (Unusual Sightings Along Aleutian Chain( are eight visual and radar observations mostly of surface ships which were thought to be submarines from the Aleutian area of Alaska. The sightings took place between March 8 and April 10, 1948, one observation involved a visual sighting of a flare like object from an aircraft and one involved a radar contact of an unknown aerial object.
(8th Sighting - 10 April 1948
(Ground Control Approach radar operator at Shemya Air Force Base, Shemya, Alaska, made a positive radar contact from 1750Z to 0812Z and 0907Z to 0920Z. The range and azimuth of the target was 8 ( [miles] at 172 degrees. The known altitude coverage of the radar at the above range was 1000 to 4000 feet and the bearing was 95 degrees magnetic. The approximate speed of the target was 14 to 16 knots.
(The weather at the time of the observation was: Ground fog
(The following operational action was taken as a result of the above sightings: ....8th Sighting. No action taken.
(In order that objects sighted as those described above can be more positively identified, it is now a standard operating procedure with all scheduled aircraft flying in the Aleutian chain to carry one pair of binoculars and one loaded K20 camera. Instruction have been given to aircrews to utilize the binoculars for search and to get photos of all unidentified objects sighted with the K20 camera.( KK-19507 Not eval. Secret
NOTES: This radar report is not found in the Project Blue Book file which is most interesting as Project SIGN did go to great lengths to obtain radar data on unknown radar contacts.
It is interesting to not that in report number four an Air Force pilot reported a submarine like object on the surface of the sea. Navy reconnaissance checking the area three days later reported a building on land with derricks near close to the position given by the Air Force pilot. The Air Force pilot returned to the area several days later and disputed the Navy(s conclusion. He stated that they did not go to the correct position given in his report.
Both the Air Defense Command and the Far East Air Force were of the opinion that a Soviet attack was likely in the Far East and Alaskan areas. The Air Force reinforced both commands and conducted more vigilant reconnaissance in these areas. Both the Army and the Navy disagreed with the Air Force on the possibility of a Soviet attack.
Unknown submarine reports like the ones in this series of reports continued and received much press attention in 1950. During the 1952 Congressional hearings Congressman Albert Gore, Sr., father of the Vice President Al Gore, accused the military of utilizing reports of mystery submarines and flying saucers a way to get the defense budget passed.
STATUS: TBP
*DATE: April 18, 1948 TIME: 1500 GCT CLASS: R/surface radar
LOCATION: SOURCES: Project Blue Book microfilms
Weather Station Able
North Atlantic 62-00 N 33-00W)
RADAR DURATION: Not stated
EVALUATIONS: Project Blue Book-birds
Incident #
Added Case: Aldrich
INITIAL SUMMARY:
U. S. C. G. C. BIBB
Commanding Officer
USCGC BIBB (WG-31), Boston 13, Mass. 12 May 48
601
From: Commanding Officer, USCGC BIBB
TO: The Commandant (INT)
Via: Commander, First Cost [sic] Guard District (dla)
Subj: Unidentified Radar Target: report of
Ref: (a) Intelligence and Law Enforcement Circular No. 1-48
1. In accordance with reference (a), the following report is submitted covering an unidentified radar target tracked while this ship was on Ocean Weather Station partol on Station Able (62-00N, 33W-00W) from 3 to 24 Apirl 1948.
2. This target was contacted on the air search radar at 1500 GCT on 18 April 1948. The first contact was made at 6500 yards and was tracked to 18,000 yards giving a velocity of approximately 30 m. p. h. The area in which the target was contacted was thoroughly searched visually and there were no clouds nor weather fronts in said area. There were no target incidation on the surface radar. The target strengtth was S5 fading at 18,000 yards.
3. The above time and date was the only time this phenomenon was observed by this ship.
/s/ V. O. JOHNSON
Ind-1
Commander, 1st Coast Guard District
Boston 13, Massachusetts
and refer to file : 0-601
Forwarded for Headquarters information.
/s/ A. G. HALL
Chief of Staff
NOTES: A few months earlier Westley Price writing in the January Saturday Evening Post discussed slow moving radar targets in an article entitled (The Sky is Haunted.( He called them (Gizmos,( a nickname applied by a number of radar operators and engineers. The gizmo handle appeared in a number of news articles in the late 1940s, but disappeared. Price highlight Kenneth Ehlers, who worked at the Landing Aids Experimental Station, at Arcata, California, and his efforts to determine what gizmos were. Ehlers had photographed the gizmos on the radar screen, directed a C-47 to investigate a gizmo contact. While the weather was clear, nothing was seen or detected by the aircraft. The article claimed that Ehlers could distinguish gizmos from aircraft by their speed--always 30 miles an hours. (His log book also shows that (1) Gizmos fly singley or in groups up to five; (2) appear in any weather, day or night; (3) cruise low, oftern at 800 feet; (4) ususally take a course about south-by-east. They fly upwind, downwind or crosswind.(
During Price(s interview with Ehlers three gizmos were acquired on the radar set. Price stepped outside to see if he could spot the objects, but nothing was seen. Elhers showed the gizmos to Dr Florcence W. VanStranten, a Navy meteorologist and Dr. Luis Alvarez, a pioneer radar developer, who invented the Ground Control Approach System, GCA,
Several of the World War II radar only cases listed here involved high speed targets. This case involves low speed targets. Already, it was known that radar could detect birds in flight, rain, clouds, etc. Published material indicated that insects might also be detected although one important paper would not be published until 1949. See:
The Radar Entomology Website
*DATE: Summer 1948 TIME: daylight CLASS: R/multiple ground radar
LOCATION: SOURCES: Letter from Major Edwin Jerome, 14 March 1961
Goose Bay, Labrador, Hall, UFO Evidence Vol 1., page 84
Canada
RADAR DURATION: two incident--not reported
EVALUATIONS: No official
Web Presence
Case Added: Aldrich
INITIAL SUMMARY: USAF and RCAF radars independently tracked unidentified radar target at 9000 mph at 60,000 feet. The next day a slow moving radar target was detected at 45,000 feet at about 10 miles per hours.
NOTES:
STATUS: TBP
*DATE: June 16, 1948 TIME: daylight CLASS: R/ ground radar, A/visual
LOCATION: SOURCES: F. Zigel, Unidentified Flying Objects in the U. S. S. R. manuscript
Baskunchak area, U. S. S. R. Page 124
RADAR DURATION: not stated
EVALUATIONS: No official evaluation
Case Added: Aldrich
INITIAL SUMMARY: A. I. Aparaksa, test pilot at Kapustin Yar saw which flying above the clouds a cucumber-shaped object which descended across his course. Beams emerged from the back of the object which was picked up on radar at the pilot(s air base. Ordered to approach the object, the pilot was at a distance of about 10 kiliometers when the beams from the object (opened up in a fan( and shone on the aircraft blinding the pilot for an instant and putting out of operation the electrical controls of the aircraft, and the engine. The object then moved upwards and buried itself in the cloud layer. The pilot managed to glide his aircraft to a landing.
NOTES: A very similar incident without radar tracking involving the same pilot was reported to have occurred on May 6, 1949. The likelihood of obtaining more or official information on this incident seems nil.
STATUS: Insufficient information.
DATE: October 15 1948 TIME: 2305 local CLASS: R/V air radar/air visual
LOCATION: SOURCES: Hynek 1978 135
Kyushu McDonald 1968 (House Symp.) 69
Japan Ruppelt 65
RADAR DURATION: 10 minutes overall
(6 separate episodes)
EVALUATIONS: Blue Book - unknown
Web Presence
PRECIS: At 2305 a 2-seat F-61 Black Widow night-fighter was flying off the NW coast of Kyushu, 50 miles @ 330 degrees from Fukuoka, when the radar operator picked up a target, range 5 miles @ 12 o'clock & slightly below the a/c. The a/c speed was between 200 & 220 mph; that of the target was 200 mph, range slowly closing. The aircrew thought they had a friendly fighter. Then the target showed a "slight" change in azimuth and "rapid" closure, appearing at the same time to dive below the a/c. The pilot attempted to follow in a 3500 fpm dive @ 300 mph, but AI radar did not immediately reacquire the target. Shortly the radar operator called a second contact, but the target outdistanced the a/c with "a burst of speed dead ahead". On a third intercept the pilot called a visual @ 60 degrees to port; the object was visible in clear silhouette against moonlit cloud and the radar acquired a target crossing ahead of the a/c from 45 degrees to port, range 3000' @ -5 degrees elevation. The pilot turned to starboard to head off the object, but the radar target put on a "burst of speed" and was lost @ 9-10 miles (maximum radar range was 10 miles). At this time the pilot decided that the object he had seen was unfamiliar and queried his ground control station, who reported that there were no known aircraft in the area. The fourth intercept again began with a pilot visual, the object passing above and from the rear. AI radar again picked up the target slightly above @ 12 o'clock, range 5 miles, but again it was lost off the set @ 10 miles. The fifth and sixth intercepts were similar: The target was picked up at > 9 miles range @ 200 mph, the a/c closing with a speed advantage of 20 mph to a range of 12,000', at which point the target pulled ahead to the maximum radar range of 10 miles in about 15-20 seconds.
Visuals: an "excellent silhouette" against a reflective moonlit undercast on the 3rd intercept, and a "fleeting" glimpse of the object passing from above and behind on the 4th intercept. The object appeared as a stubby cigar with a tapering, squared-off tail-end, a little like a "rifle bullet" the approximate size of an a/c fuselage; it had a dull or dark finish, with no visible features or control surfaces. There were no other a/c in the area, and there was no ground radar contact with the object. Target altitudes were between 5-6000'.
NOTES: The fact that no ground radar contact was reported is difficult to interpret; according to the intelligence report the F-61 was detected by ground radar during the incident, but only intermittently. According to McDonald, "The report indicates that this may have been due to 'ground clutter'." However the area of the incident is 50 miles out in the Korea Strait between the Tsu Islands and the west coast of Japan. A more likely reason for intermittent painting of the F-61 is that it was flying at or below 6000' @ range 50 miles, a line-of sight elevation on the order of 1 degree and thus close to the likely radar horizon. This might well make the a/c a marginal target whose detectability was critically dependent on aspect. The visual description of the "UFO" - a smoothly moulded appearance without visible canopy, wings, power section or tail assembly - is consistent with a target of very much smaller radar cross-section than the F-61 at any aspect, making it a very much more marginal target even than the "intermittently" detected F-61.
Of 6 separate AI contacts two were visually corroborated, one by an "excellent silhouette" which resembled no known controlled aeroform of 1948 and is difficult to equate with birds, clouds, windblown debris or balloons. Perhaps the most plausible explanation is that the pilot saw the shadow of his own a/c on the moonlit undercast. The second "fleeting" glimpse might be dismissed. Nevertheless on each occasion the AI contacts corroborated the visual observations in a natural way, picking up the target as the object would have moved into the forward scanning coverage of the radar - first time moving into the pattern @ 45 degrees to port, range 3000' following a visual @ 60 degrees; second time being picked up slightly above and @ 12 0'clock, range 26,000', moving ahead of the a/c after a visual of the object passing above and from behind. Both acquisitions are consistent with the elevation-scan limits of this type of AI radar. The speeds and relative movements of the 6 targets on different headings and at different elevations are individually difficult to interpret in terms of anomalous propagation of ground returns, and collectively impossible to interpret in terms of the same set of AP conditions. At the same time the behaviour of the targets exhibits a rational consistency which, supported by two corroborative visual observations, is strongly suggestive of a real radar reflective target.
On the 5th & 6th intercepts, the target accelerated away from the F-61 at a minimum relative speed of about 1400 mph, which, added to the aircraft speed, yields a true airspeed of well over 1600 mph. Clearly the target could not have been another aircraft. Yet the intelligence report notes that "the object seemed cognizant of the whereabouts of the F-61 at all times" as though it carried "radar warning equipment" and concludes that the airmen were "of excellent character and intelligence". Both men felt strongly that the object was a controlled vehicle: "In my opinion," offered the radar operator, "we were shown a new type aircraft by some agency unknown to us." The first jets, the Gloster Meteor and the Messerschmidt 262, entered service in 1944, but the first flight to exceed Mach 1 was not achieved until 1947 by the experimental Bell X-1 rocket aircraft, and even if some unknown prototype development of the X-1 had achieved Mach 2 combined with combat-agility within 12 months one would hardly expect it to be idling around over the Sea of Japan.
In summary the 6 radar and 2 concurrent visual contacts are not easily interpreted in terms of known propagation anomalies or other natural phenomena, and there is a convincing impression of intelligent evasive flying by a vehicle with a performance greatly in excess of known aircraft capability in 1948.
STATUS: unknown
*DATE: 6 November 1948 TIME: CLASS: R/V - ground radar
LOCATION: SOURCES: Project Blue Book files (Maxwell AFB microfilm)
Goose Bay Air Force Base,
Labrador, Canada
RADAR DURATION:
EVALUATIONS:
Web presence:
Case Added: Sparks
INITIAL SUMMARY: Oct. 29 [27?], 1948. Goose Bay AFB, Labrador, Canada (53.33_ N, 60.41_ W). On this date or succeeding dates Oct. 31, and Nov. 1, 1948, slow-moving unidentified targets were tracked at low altitude. On one date 2 targets were on a collision course S of base and were radioed a warning, the targets then veered off. (McDonald list; FUFOR Index; Ruppelt manuscript)
NOTES:
STATUS: TBP
DATE: 6 November 1948 TIME: CLASS: R - ground radar
LOCATION: SOURCES: Hynek Draft Project Grudge Report Information Sheet
Wakkanai, Japan
RADAR DURATION: one hour and five minutes
EVALUATIONS: Grudge - Soviet aircraft
Incident Number: 198
Case Added: Aldrich
INITIAL SUMMARY: Draft Project Grudge summary in Dr. J. Allen Hynek(s papers:
I. Description of Incident:
Target appeared in ground clutter area during entire period of observation. Target was not observed in station area, and was not observed visually at any time. At times the target appeared as 2 aircraft and at another time as a aircraft. Gave impression of 2 fighter craft dog-fighting. Evaluated as Soviet aircraft conducting electronic reconnaissance mission. Thought to be a Soviet (Ferret( since the object was computed to have held a speed of 240 MPH and since the size of blip radarscope was normal for an aircraft. The unidentified aircraft circled (20 mile radius) continuously for one hour and five minutes immediately above radar site installed at Wakkanai. No authorized aircraft was in the vicinity. Weather conditions precluded visual observation.
II. Astronomer(s Comments:
This incident has no astronomical explanation. The object has been independently identified from radar information as a Soviet aircraft.
NOTES: Note, the similarity with the 1947 Far East Air Force UFO reports. As noted by the press, the incidents occurred during overcast conditions and involved radar only observations. As in the Chitose AAB report of 1 July 1947, the target in this case seemed at times to be two objects.
(Ferret( flight operations involve radar and other electronic intelligence gathered by flights near or into target territory.
STATUS: TBP
DATE: 23 November 1948 TIME: 2200 local CLASS: R/V - ground radar, multiple air visual
LOCATION: SOURCES: Ruppelt 65
Furstenfeldbruck
AFB near Munich
Germany RADAR DURATION: "few minutes" plus
EVALUATIONS: Grudge - "unknown"
Web Presence
November 23, 1948, an F-80 pilot flying near
Furstenfeldbruck, Germany
What Radar Tells About Flying Saucers by Donald Keyhoe
PRECIS: An F-80 pilot (Captain, considered "completely reliable") observed a "reddish star" heading S across Munich and E of the AFB, turning SW then SE. Altitude unknown, speed estimated 200-600 mph. The pilot radioed his base, who reported that nothing had been observed on radar but advised that they would check again. The radar site called back with a target @ 27,000' 30 miles S of Munich traveling @ 900 mph. The pilot visually confirmed the new location of the red light. In "a few minutes" radar showed the target @ 50,000' & circling 40 miles S of Munich. The visual sighting was confirmed by a second USAF pilot (also Captain). No aircraft or balloons were in the area.
NOTES: The displayed speed is inconsistent with aircraft, birds, insects, windborne objects, CAT or partial inversion reflections. The elevation of approx. 10 degrees is also marginal for grazing incidence. The target was evidently observed on both PPI and R.I. scopes, probably at different frequencies. Thus AP is prima facie unattractive in this instance. Two F-80s were in the area, so a multiple reflection "ghost" is possible, but the relative speeds & altitudes of a/c and target are unknown; however, the reported "circling" alone is very unlikely in terms of the required reflection geometry. Sidelobe returns offer no explanation for the displayed speed. Multiple-trip echoes from aircraft or meteor-wake ionisation beyond the unambiguous range cannot explain the displayed speed (too high and too low rsepectively), whilst the duration and "circling" manoeuvre further exclude a meteor-wake. Spurious internal signals or RFI could be possible causes of the 10-mile S PPI track, but are unlikely in view of reported "circling" and especially so given the probable electronic independence of R.I. & PPI scopes. The low-definition visual corroboration from 2 pilots would be worth more if better radar data were available.
In terms of the limited but specific (qualitative) information available there appears to be no reason to challenge the Grudge evaluation of "unknown". However there is insufficient information to certify it, and the case cannot be considered probative. (Note: this case does not appear in the final Blue Book listing of "unknowns", but this should not be taken to imply any reinvestigation since many such cases became victims of post-Robertson statistical reorganisation from 1953 onwards.)
STATUS: Insufficient information
DATE: May 21 1949 TIME: afternoon CLASS: R/V ground radar/Air visual
LOCATION: SOURCES: Hynek (1978) 141
AEC Plant,
Hanford, Washington
RADAR DURATION: unspecified
EVALUATIONS: Blue Book - aircraft
Intenet reference:
PRECIS: An object was sighted visually by personnel of the Hanford AEC facility. It was in restricted airspace over the plant and appeared to be hovering. It was observed through a telescope and appeared to be silvery and disc-shaped. Radar of the 637th ADCC at Hanford also detected a target between 17,000' and 20,000'. The Hanford site scrambled an F-82 from nearby Moses Lake AFB to intercept, but before the a/c was airborne the target left the Hanford radiation pattern to the S at a speed in excess of a jet fighter. The F-82 conducted an unsuccessful visual search of the area.
NOTES: Blue Book evaluated the target as an aircraft, apparently on the basis of another incident occurring later that afternoon: Again a target was detected in restricted airspace, but was positively identified as a light aircraft dropping advertising leaflets. The investigating officer emphasised that "two separate and distinct alert conditions existed on the afternoon of 21 May 1949 . . . . It is believed that there is no connection between the two events."
The degree of correlation between radar and visual observations is impossible to assess, and neither radar nor visual sightings are independently evaluable on the basis of the information presented.
STATUS: Insufficient information
*DATE: Fall, 1949 TIME: local CLASS: R/ground radar
LOCATION: Key Atomic SOURCES: Life Magazine, April 1952
Installation, USA
RADAR DURATION: about four minutes
EVALUATIONS: No official
Internet reference:
Added Case: Aldrich
INITIAL SUMMARY: A formation of 5 objects moved across the radar screen in less than four minutes, indicating speed faster than any then existing aircraft. The formation was maintained across the whole scope.
NOTES: Of the possible location of the radar site, the most likely would seem to be one of the following: Kirkland Air Force, Los Alamos or Walker Air Force Base (Roswell), New Mexico. The radars protecting Oak Ridge and Hanford were not well established in 1949. While progress was made in the Washington state area, radar coverage was not on a full time basis and many problems were yet to be overcome. In the Oak Ridge area the radars were not completely operational until 1950. Source: Headquarters, Air Defense Command, Special Historical Study #1: The Air Defense of Atomic Energy Installations, March 1946-December 1952.
STATUS: TBP
................
................
In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.
To fulfill the demand for quickly locating and searching documents.
It is intelligent file search solution for home and business.
Related searches
- february heart health month ideas
- february heart health month poster
- february heart health month
- february heart health month printables
- philadelphia experiment 1943 declassified
- 0 apr car deals february 2020
- 1943 american lafrance for sale
- february heart health month activities
- february heart awareness ideas
- february heart awareness month handouts
- february heart health month facts
- february heart awareness month flyer