UFO files from the UK government; DEFE 24/2030

8/7/2019 UFO files from the UK government; DEFE 24/2030

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/ufo-files-from-the-uk-government-defe-242030 1/298

(c) 'C ro wn c o py r i g ' , h tw - r-



\ ~ ~ ~ , A e ~ u ~ 1 f l ~ D.

MINISTRY OF DEFENCE

Date opened (Date of. . enclosure)

, Oct 1 9 1 5

.: \0\'. : . . f l _ . . , . ' \ . .

. ~OV .. ~ ..

MOD Form 3290(Revised 2/99)

PPQ::I 100

Attention is drawnto the notes on

the Inside flap.

OIVISION/ESTABLISHMENT/UNIT/BRANCH

40AS U £C )4-A~on ~2+-S"

NA- tN ~L .OG-

2. Enter notes ofrelated files on

page 2 of this

Jacket

SUBJECT UFOS -. PUSiskd: ~(Ie.~(~-·

D \ I ' · 0 C . 1 C M " K e .

Referred to Referred to Date Date

•

MiniEne•

MinIEncl Referred to Date



DR CLARKE'S LETTERS AND INFORMATION REQUESTED

1st Letter - 21 June 2000

Requested access to files from 1969 to date. Files currently closed under 30 year rule.

Letter answered on 25 July 2000. Request refused under Exemption 9 (voluminous &

vexatious request) and Exemption 12 (privacy of an individual) of the Code of

Practice on Access to Government Information.

2nd Letter - 1 August 2000

Narrowed request to following:

1. Sequence offiles following DEFE 31119 - 1968-1981

_identified DIS fIles;

55/40/9/1 Pt 3 (1968-1971) UFO Policy - File destroyed 8 August 1984

55/108115 Pt 4 (1971-1996) UFO Policy - File held by DIS

2. UFO sighting reports to the MOD during January 1974 (Possibly Air 20/12556)

_identified;

Am 2/18873 (1973-74) UFO Reports - File for release to PRO 2005 (currently

with Records 1)

AF/584 (January 1974) UFO Reports - File with Records 1

There are 250 pages on these files and 150 would need to be sanitised. __

has provided an estimate of cost.

3. HJ 5/311 UFO Meteorological Aspects (1968-70)

File due to be opened to the public at the PRO on 1 January 2001. Dr Clarke

said in his letter dated 10 October 2000 that as the file will be available

un-sanitised in the PRO in January 2001 he will wait. He has withdrawn hisrequest for this file.

4. DEFE 44/1 and DEFE 21

Records advise these files are retained in Department in accordance with

Section 3(4) Public Records Act.



3rd Letter - 11August 2000

5. BJ 5/311 Meteorological Aspects 1968-70

As 3. Above.

6. AIR 2118564 UFO Reports: West Freugh 1957

File covers 1957-71, due for release to PRO 2002 but currently with Records 1.Consists of 75 pages, 25 need to be sanitised. __ has provided an estimate

of cost.

7. A F/3459175 UFOs: Policy and Policy Statements 1970

File currently with Records 1. Consists of 115 pages, 5 need to be sanitised.__ has provided an estimate of cost.

8 . D /S ec(A S) 11 2/1 (5 parts dealing with policy D/Sec(AS)64/1 issues)

D/Sec(AS) 12/1 Pt A- UFO Policy (1985) -Currently held at HayesD/Sec(AS) 64/1 Pt A- UFO Policy (1996) -Held by DAS 4a(Sec)-CONFIDENTALD/Sec(AS) 64/1 Pt B -UFO Policy -Held by DAS 4a(Sec)-SECRETD/Sec(AS) 6411Pt C -UFO Policy -Held by DAS 4a(Sec)-CONFIDENTALD/Sec(AS) 64/1 Pt D -UFO Policy -Held by DAS 4a(Sec)-UNCLASSIFIED

Advice needed from OMD 14. I think the only part of the Code we may be ableto withhold this under is Exemption 2b (Internal discussion and advice.

Information whose disclosure would harm the frankness and candour of internal

discussion, including: h. internal opinion, advice, recommendation, consultation

and deliberation).

9. D /Sec(AS) 64/5 Media Issues

This file is a DAS 4a (Sec) current file and consists of mainly newspaper cuttings

and magazine articles. There are 197 pages. There are some notes written byDAS (Sec) staff on some of the cuttings and the file also contains 7 pages

classified RESTRICTED which deals with a Daily Mail and Daily Express articleon 24 April 1998. This article talks about RAF Fylingdales.

Advice needed from OMD 14on whether if we release this file, can we sanitisethe comments of DAS Staff and withhold the Restricted pages or do we have torelease the whole file or nothing.



10. DS8175/6 UFO TV Discussion (1976)

Currently held byRecord 2. We needtocheckwith_about releaseofthis fileas it isnot mentionedinhis letter.

11. AIR 20/12556 UFO Reports January 1974

Seenumber 2 above.



\ While I would question the basis upon which my request has been refused. I do not

wish to add to your administrative burden by asking for a review or involving my ~

~\",e.pI' at this stage. I would be more happy to take up your offer of help to locate "a more. \ " ' V limited amount of material" which might fall within the terms of your Code of Practice

for Access to Government Information. I would be happy to guided by yourself as to

~ what you feel would be a reasonable request for access to a "limited amount" of

material.

! Further to your offer, firstly I would like to point out that my research is not

specifically concerned with the details of individual "Uf'O sightings" reported .. by

i~~~-:--.-..-- i

L-.~;;.:=-_~

1 August, 2000

Your reference: D/Sec(AS)64/3

Dea~

Many thanks for your detailed letter of25 July with reference to my request to view

MOD files relating to 'unidentified flying objects.'

Firstly, I realise your staff have ~aJ1Y othermore pressing defence-related duties and I ., .. ,,_ ,..

apologise if my request has added to that burden. I contacted the Freedom of

Information office on 20 July inquiring as to what had become of my original request.

simply because I was concerned that my letter had gone astray. or had been sent to the

wrong department, as I had not at that stage received an acknowledgement. Almost

immediately I received your acknowledgement in the post, and would like to make it

clear that I have always been satisfied with the helpful and detailed responses received

from the MOD's Secretariat (Air Staff) on the occasions I have contacted your

department in the past.

With regards to my request to view files, I accept that my request for access to files

covering the period 1969 to present was a little ambitious in terms of staff time, From

your response, it appears that the main obstacle preventing the use of these files for

research projects such as my own is the Exemption 9 in the Code of Practice which

relates to Privacy of the individual. You say you receive up to 400 sighting reports

each year and a similar number of letters, but I wonder if you could specify how many

of the individuals who contact the department in anyone year have requested that their

personal details should remain confidential for 30 years? From cursory viewing of the

files which are available at the PRO relating to the period before 1969, I cannot recall

finding one single request of this kind, and indeed many of the sightings and letters

relate to events which are already in the "public domain", for example have alreadybeen reported in newspapers and other media.



individua ls to the MOD. I am mor e in te re ste d in studying the e volution of how the old

Air Min is try , and late r the MOD, dealt w ith these kind of inquirie s, how p olicy on this

su bje ct w as form u la te d, a nd h ow th at p olicy h as b ee n in flu en ce d b y sp ecific in cid en ts,

G ov ernm e nt p olicy, P arlia m en ta ry q ue stio ns, sc ie ntific o pin io n a nd th e m e dia .

T o this end, I have foun d the m a te ria l in the D efe nce In te llige nce S ta ff re giste re d file spa rt icu la rly o f i nt e re s t. Of the tw o file s curre ntly ava ilable at the P RO , DEFE 31/118

(UFO policy 1953-63) and DEFE 31/119 (UFO Policy 1967) c on ta in p re cise ly th e

c ate gory o f in fo rma t io n Im se ekin g : fo r example internal m emo ra nd um s, d ra ft p olicy

d oc um e n ts e tc . T he re is little , if any , corr espondence from th e p ub lic c on ta in ed w ith in

th ese file s wh ic h fall w ithin E xe m ption 1 2 (Priva cy) or the e xe m ptions re la tin g to

n atio na l se cu rity . F urth er to th is d eta il, Iw ould like to ap ply for access to the sequence D I s ; . 1 = 1 ~so ffile s wh ic h fo llow DEFE 311119 a nd w hich p re sum a bly re la te to UFO policy, 5S(l fO!aj , P t]b etw ee n th e ye ars 1968 an d 1 981 . T his re que st re la te s to sp ecific file s, fa llin g w ithin a ' c t , : ~ Jsp ecified pe riod of tim e , so you m ay fee l it w ould be w orthw hile em p loying a m ore i t \ ; : y . . ~ J e k . _focusse d se arch to re trie ve an d scrutin ise the se p ap ers on m y be half. I 0 ( ! 5 p~-'

In te rm s of A ir Staff file s re la tin g to s ightin g /s reported by the general public , the one '- __ - .~ ~ _ : \ ; L .spec if ic f il e Iw ish to view re la tes to U F O/uniden tified aircra ft sightings rep orte d to the {~~~

M OD during the m onth of January 1974. Follow in g the file se que nce at the PRO It, ~~. ':tsusp ect this file w ould be be found a t the re ference A ir 20112556 (Air 20/12555 re la te s ~

to Decem be r 1973) . ~

~ tZ {~

Iw ould also like to ap ply for access to a file p ro du ce d b y th e M e te oro lo gica l O ffice

for the M OD , reference BJ 5/311 ti tle d "Un id ent ifie d F ly in g Ob je ct s: m e t e oro logic al

asp ects" which re la te s to the period 1968-1970 . This file is due to be opened at the

PRO on 1 J an ua ry 2 00 1.

From m y re se arch in to historical file s a t the P ublic R ecord O ffice , I susp ect the re m a y

a lso be m em oranda and rep orts re la ting to U F Os in the 19505 hidde n w itli)he D efence

In teU i ge n ce F ile s, c la ss n umb e rs DEFE 44/1 and DEFE 21 , and I have contacted the

MOD D ep artm ental R ecord O ffice r sep arate ly w ith a re que st for access to this

m ateria l. D EFE 44 contains pape rs from as far back as 1946, but these rem ain

c la ssifie d b ec au se th e file a lso c on ta in s m a te ria l from 1991. I w ould like to re que st

access to the block of file s and m em oranda which re la te to the period 1946 to 1969,

which should be available for scrutiny un de r the Fre edom of In form a tion A ct.

r hope you will fee l it is possible to a llow m e to have access to at least som e of the

m a te ria l sp ecifie d in this le tte r, for use in w hat is a bon a fide a cade m ic re se arch

p rogram m e. I w ould be hap py to m eet any re asonable costs incurred-as;'fe Sult of this

a~ and would be willing to sign any undertakings re la ted to Data Protection

Of Offic ia l S e cre ts whic h y ou m i gh t fe e l a pp ro pria te . In addition , I w ill be hap py to

p rovide the M OD with a copy of m y com ple ted research paper, which I p lan to. p ublish

via the N ation al C e ntre for E nglish C u ltural T radition a t the U n ive rsity of S he ffie ld.__ -.~, ....-.~_._..- , • - '"~"~"""~"--"""~_'.,"',_._...,.,_...__~_'..._..._.~_,_"'.._._...._., . ~..~.._~""'""'~_._~_•_ ""' .. ~-'....,..,..........-._r ..,.......

Inm aking this request, I am sim p ly resp onding to the G overnm e nt's and the MOO's

ow n state d m a nife sto p le dge to "e stablish a ge ne ral sta tutory right of acce ss to officia l

re cords an d through culture cha nge throughout the p ublic se ctor' (MOD w ebsite ).T his la ud ab le a im will on ly be se en to w orkin g in p ractise if re asona ble re que sts for



access to non-sensitive material, a category Ieel my request falls within, are

successful. This touches upon the discussion Imentioned Ihad with the MODiRAF

Press Office in January this year, when I tried to follow up a story in the national Presswhich suggested that all files relating to UFOs were soon to be released to the PRO. I!was told at that time by the duty Press Officer that the former minister Peter Kilfoyle (

had indeed expressed the opinion that there was no good reason for keeping files (

related to UFOs restricted for 30 years. He said release of UFO data was likely to be a)

priority following "a review of the files." There was, I was told, "a general move (

within the department to give out information that is not security sensitive and take (

away the myth of secrecy that surrounds this subject." .

I hope we will be able to reach an agreement on access to the limied amount of files

specified in this letter, and that this application will not be too onerous upon your

department's time.

I am copying this reply to"'at O~/AD. Room 617, NorthumberlandHouse, so that he is aware that I am happy with the expeditious and helpful way you-

have dealt with my inquiry.



, - - - - ~ ~ . - -Dr David Clarke 2 3 J U N 2 0 0 0

Ministry of Defence

Main Building

Whitehall

London SWIA 2HB

21 June 2000

Dear Sir/Madam,

Freedom of Information - Access to MOD files relating to aerial phenomena

I am undertaking post doctoral research into the socio-psychological aspects of belief in

the aerial phenomena popularly known as 'unidentified flying objects', as an Honorary

Research Fellow at the National Centre for English Cultural Tradition, University of

Sheffield.

In particular, I am examining the role played by the mass media in the creation andtransmission of beliefs and rumours about UFOs, and how these have been reflected in

the Ministry of Defence's public policy towards this subject from 1950 to the present.

While a certain amount of useful information can be obtained from the study of Press

reports, the proceedings of Hansard and the records of private researchers, a study of this

kind is reliant upon access to official records such as those available at the Public Record

Office.

Currently access to records kept by the MOD relating to UFO phenomena, including

those relating to the formulation of official policy, are covered by the Access to Public

Records Act, 1967. This has meant that the vast majority of records relating to thissubject are made available for public inspection when they are 30 years old. As a result, a

number of MOD air files relating to UFO reports and policy issues relating to the period

1953-1969 have already been released and are available for study at the PRO.

However, at present records dating from 1969 to the present day remain closed under the

terms of the 1967 Act. Despite this fact, during the past decade the MOD have released

information relating to UFOs in response to individual requests from the public which,

strictly speaking, continue to remain closed under the 30 year rule.



Under the definitions used by the Draft Freedom of Information Act (1999) allGovernment records - other that those created by the Security and Intelligence Services -should be available for public scrutiny unless it can be demonstrated their disclosurewould clearly cause harm to "national security, defence and international relations ... theinternal discussion of Government policy [and/or] personal privacy."

Since the 1950s, the UK Government's public position has been that reports of'unidentified flying objects' have no implications for defence or national security. As aresult, there would appear to be no reason, other than protection of personal privacy, whyrecords maintained on this subject should not be made available for study purposes suchas the one I am proposing.

Indeed, in January this year I contacted the RAF Press Office who confirmed that theMinistry of Defence, in response to the published aims of the draft Freedom of

Information Bill, were considering a proposal to allow access to UFO related files -currently closed under the 30 year rule - for what were described as "bona fideresearchers." This was on the proviso that any proposed future access did notcompromise confidential personal data supplied to the MOD by members of the publicand/or endanger national security.

A preliminary examination of the MOD air files on UFOs from 1953-1969 which areavailable at the PRO has demonstrated their value as a rich source of historical and socialdata relevant to my proposed study. For example, a Defence Intelligence briefing from1966-67 released to the Public Record Office last year (DEFE 311119)demonstrates howMOD staff were aware of the importance of these social and psychological factors,

specifically the role played by the mass media, in the wax and wane of interestsurrounding UFO reports..

These records have hitherto never been the subject of a properly funded academicresearch project. The value of such a study to the UK Govenunent, in terms of thedevelopment of public policy in future, should also be taken into account when thisrequest is considered. An independent study of this historical material might also help todispel the popular myth of "secrecy" and "cover-up" which continues to surround the

MOD's public statements on the subject of UFOs.

I am currently in receipt of an award from the British Academy to study the creation andtransmission of rumours in the context of popular beliefs which spread through Britainduring the First World War, based upon records preserved at the Public Record Office.Later this year I intend to apply to another funding body for an additional award whichwould allow me to study the development of popular beliefs about UFOs and how thesehave been reflected by MOD policy from the 1950s to the present. As it stands, theproposed study would have to be based upon the MOD air files which are currentlyavailable, and relate to the period 1953-1969.

2



I wish to make a formal application via the Freedom of Information Unit of the MOD for

access to MOD Air files relating to UFOs and UFO policy for the period 1969 to the

present day. I would define access as having the opportunity to examine all relevant files

relating to UFO reports and UFO policy, making notes and copies of relevant material

where necessary. I appreciate a project of this kind could take time and would incur costs,

but these could easily be incorporated into my application for a research award.

I would welcome to opportunity to discuss this proposal informally with a representative

from the Ministry of the Defence andlor the Freedom of Information Unit and look

forward to hearing from you,

3



F ly ing Sauce ry rage r or z

flyingsaucery.com exists to publishthe research findings fromveteran fortean researchers DavidClarke and Andy Roberts.

"•••A myth isnot a

fairy story. Itis thepresentation of facts

belonging to onecategory in the

Idioms appropriate toanother. Toexplodea myth Is accordingly

not todeny the factsbut to re-allocatethem."

Gilbert Royle (1900-

1976) British

philosopher

Since the early 1980s we have worked closely on a

variety of Fortean subjects from UFOlogy to EarthMysteries. The results of these researches have been

published in several books, magazines, newspapers,

booklets and IVprograms (see bibl iography) and more

specifically via the pages of UFOBrigantia.

Since the late 1990s we have been delving deep into

UFOlogy in the United Kingdom since WWII, re-investigating so called "classic cases", visiting the Public

Record Office and other archival sources of information,

tracing and interviewing key witnesses and Ministry of

Defence employees at al l levels of UFO research and

investigation.

The results of this research will be

published in our next book, ti tled,

Out ofthe Shadows: UFOS, the

Establishment & the official

Cover-up, due from Piatkus in

May 2002.

In addition, flyingsaucery.com will

act as a outlet for the

dissemination of our on-going

research, along with commentary

on what is taking place in UK

UFOlogy today. We wil l also

occasionally be revealing significant breakthroughs in

research.

The first of these is the much sought after M.O.D. fileon the Rendlesham forest incident of 1980, that has

been described by some as "Britain's Roswell" - CLICK

HERE - brought to you first by us.

World Exclusive:

After half a century

http://www.flyingsaucery.comlhome.htm

The MOD

X-Files&0>

The Rendlesham

Filesto>

No Kidding

This Timeu.MyFlying Saucer

Photo is

Genuine!go>

. . .

22/10/01

http://www.flyingsaucery.comlhome.htm/




Flying Sauceryof denials we can

reveal the contents

of the British

Governments top

secret " . E t i i ! : u lSaucer Study· • the

origin of the UFO

'cover-up' .

Page 2 012

Another Flying

Saucery first, is the

presentation of our

research that reveals the truth behind two classic

British UFO photographs taken by Alex Bitch and

Stephen Darbishire. Read it and weep.

•

Ifyou want your belief in alien visitation stroked or

need seating plans for the 6.15 from Zeta Reticul li

flyingsaucery.com is going to disappoint you. However

if you want the best in comprehensive, up to the minute

exploration in the murky depths of contemporary and

historical UFOlogy then welcome aboard.

Dave and Andy would be delighted to hear from you if

you have any comments or criticisms of the material

you'll find here.

We can be contacted at: [email protected]

flyingsaucery.com is dasiqned and maintained by Mike

Wootten

© 2001 Andy Roberts and Dave Clarke

http://www.flyingsaucery.comlhome.htm 22/10/01

mailto:[email protected]






Flying Saucery

. '

•

INTERESTS

Dave and Andy are working on a number of other UFO and fortean projects and would beinterested in any information you may have on the following:

FlyingSaucers" Unidentified FlyingObjects

British contactees 1947· 70/George Adamski in the UKUFOIogy in the 1950s'Death' rays and related phenomenaPhantom airship sightings of the late 19th/early 20th centuriesFoo FightersGhost aircraft/phantom helicoptersAlleged crashed saucers in the UKThe Berwyn Mountain 'UFOcrash'Aerial Phenomena Enquiry Network (APEN)

Earth Mysteries/Forteana

The Big Grey Man of Ben McDhui (and other mountain panics)Pagan survivals in the UKCeltic stone heads and other "Cursed" objectsSpring·heeled lackSpooklights and Earthlights

BIOGRAPHY

ANDY ROB ER TS

Is the author of

Catflaps: Anomalous Big Cats in the North, Brigantia Books 1986/CFZ 2001Phantoms of the Sky (with David Clarke), Robert Hale 1989/90Earthlights Revelation (contributing author), Blandford 1991Ghosts & legends of Yorkshire, larrold 1992Twilight of the Celtic Gods (with David Clarke) Blandford, 1996/97The UFOsThat Never Were (with Jenny Randles &. David Clarke· Feb. 2000)

In addition Andy has contributed chapters to the following compitatlons;

UFOs1947-87, Fortean Tomes, 1987Phenomenon, Macdonald &. Co., 1988Fortean Studies 3, John Brown Publishing, 1996Fortean Studies 5, John Brown Publishing 1999

TV &. Radio:

Andy has contributed to many local and national TV and radio shows. Heworked as a consultanton and appeared in:

The Isle Is Full Of Noises, Everyman, BBCl, Broadcast 1/11/92and

Down To Earth, Fourwinds for Discovery channel, also shown on Channel 4Origin Unknown, Granada, Broadcast Jan/Feb 1999The Haunted Valley Granada, Broadcast, November 2000

http://www.flyingsaucery.comlwho.htm 22/10/01

http://www.flyingsaucery.comlwho.htm/




F ly ing Sauce ryMajor Magazine Articles:

•Andy edited the seminal UFOmagazine, UFOBrigantia, for 25 Issues and also edits the sporadicscandal-rag The Armchair UFologist .

In addition Andy has written for numerous publications including: The Dalesman, , Fortean Times,UFOTimes,The Guardian, Yorkshire Post, Bradford Telegraph &. Argus, Magonla, Northern Earth

His article, Rocking the Alien, dealing with pop music's fascination with UFOswas the cover featurearticle for the July 1996 issue of Fortean TImes and was also printed In the G2 section of TheGuardian

He can be contacted at: [email protected]

DAV ID C LARK E

Ph.D in English Cultural Tradition and Language, University of Sheffield (1999)Thesis subject was the cult of the human head in Celtic mythology, British tradition and folklore.

SA (Hons) dual honours Archaeology and Medieval History at Sheffield University (graduated1990).

As a UFOlogist, I was a founder member of the independent UFONetwork (tUN) in 1987 and of theUFOInvestigator's Network (UFOIN) in 1999. Ihave also served as a Council member of the BritishUFO R.esearchAssociation (BUFORA) in the late 1980s.As a journalist, Ihave worked for ten years on local newspapers including the RotherhamAdvertiser and Sheffield Star and now work freelance as a journalist and

full time as an author.

Ihold a Honorary Research Fellowship in the National Centre for English Cultural Tradition andLanguage, University of Sheffield, where Ieach Traditions of Supernatural Belief, a 2nd and 3rdyear undergraduate option In the School of English.

My specialist areas of research interest are:

• contemporary legend and belief: speCifically 'space age' folklore (conspiracy theories/flying

saucer' and UFObeliefs);

• rumour transmission and rumour-panics within a supernatural context;

• the interface between archaeology, oral tradition and belief;

• custom and belief, speCifically In the context of northern England and the PeakDistrict

Books:

Phantoms of the Sky: UFOs- A Modern Myth? (with Andy Roberts), london: Robert Hale, 1990.Ghosts and legends of the Peak District, Norwich: Jarrold Publishing, 1991.Strange South Yorkshire: Myth, Magic and Memory in the valley of the Don, Wilmslow: SigmaPress, 1994.A Guide to Britain's Pagan Heritage, London: Robert Hale, 1995.Twilight of the Celtic Gods: An exploration of Britain's hidden pagan traditions, london: BlandfordPress, 1996.

The UFOsthat Never Were, London (with Jenny Randles and Andy Roberts), Allison & . Busby, 1999.Supernatural Peak District, London: Robert Hale, 2000.

Contributor to:

Fortean Times, Fortean Studies, Folklore Journal, Peak and Pennine Magazine, UFOMagazine, UFO

Brigantia, Third Stone, International UFO Reporter.

UFOs 1947-87 (Fortean Times)Phenomenon (edited by John Spencer &. Hilary Evans)Earth lights Revelation (Paul Devereux)Fortean Studies 3 (John Brown Publishing)Fortean Studies 6 (John Brown Publishing)

Series contributor to:

lWT 'Strange But True' (2 series); BBC Mysteries; BBCClose Up North; Granada 'TV 'OriginUnknown,' Channel 4 Equinox, Four Winds Production, XYTV; Granad lV ''The HauntedValley" (November 20DO)

David can be contacted via email [email protected]

http:/ /www.flyingsaucery.comlwho.htm 22/10 /01









F ly in g S a uc er y

.

., The MOODo~ument$

Qo Appe~:dht

WORLD EXCLUSIVE: BRITAIN'S SECRET UFO X-FILES REVEALED

For fifty years UFOlogists have been searching for evidence of a secret study by the Ministry of

Defence into the 'flying saucer' mystery.

Now we can Exclusively reveal the existence of a UFO study group created by British intelligence in

1950 and the contents of their final report - classified for half a century.

This was the first and only official UFO study by the British Government that has formed the basis

for all policy on the subject up to present.

In 1955 and again in 1962 the MOD assured Major Patrick Wall MP in answer to Parliamentary

Question that there 'had been no formal inquiry.' He was lied to.

For in 1952 the Secretary of State for Air referred to 'a full intelligence study' of the saucers in a

reply to Prime Minister Winston Churchill's request to know 'the truth.'

During the research for our book 'Out of the Shadows' we discovered the final surviving copy of the

report by the 'Flying Saucer Working Party' - DSl/mC Report No 7 Unidentified Flying Objects.

As one of the authors, RAF Wing Commander Myles Formby, told us: "the report was never

published but was circulated at the highest level and was used as a 'yardstick' for future action."

Questions or media enquiries should be directed to: [email protected]

Documents reproduced courtesy of Crown Copyright


ht tp : / /www.flyingsaucery.com lmod/index.htm 22110101


http://www.flyingsaucery.comlmod/index.htm

http://www.flyingsaucery.comlmod/index.htm




U n title d Docume n t .L 1.+0- '" . .. .. .. .. .. .

commentary

http://www.fiyingsaucery.com/mod/comtop.htm 22/10101

http://www.fiyingsaucery.com/mod/comtop.htm

http://www.fiyingsaucery.com/mod/comtop.htm



F ly ing Sauce ry

•

UFOBrigantia is

back! We will be re-.....L...... shing classicarticles from the

U.K's. finest UFO

magazine and

frequently adding

new material.

UFO Brigantia originated as amonthly UFO magazine in the

early 1980s, edited by the

enigmatic Paul Bennett. Initially

it was the house journal of the

West Yorkshire UFO Research

Group (WYUFORG). Andy

Roberts took over 2 1S editor in

1985, when the magazine went

bi-monthiy and eventually

quarterly as the journal of theIndependent UFO Network

(tUN).

~·~~.t4ti·~~fi~;~:~8It'~~@ iNo Kidding This Time...MyFiving Saucer Photo is

Genuine!

Full Report

The Berwyn Mountain UFO Crash Word doc

Howden Moor Summary Word doc

The Howden Moor Incident Word doc

UFO aver North Sea Word doc:

Sc:hweinfurt - A MYstery Salved? Word doc

The Northumbrian UFO Crash of 1969 Word doc

Mv Flying Saucer Photo... Word doc

There has never been another

magazine like UFO Brigantia. more flies to come ...

Mixing hard core investigativeufology with biting satire and

sarcasm Brigantia left no stone

unturned in its quest to

represent ufology as It is rather

than how some of its

proponents would like it to be.

UfO Brigantia's list of

columnists, contributors and

interviewees was impressive

and included most of the best

known names of the 80s and

90s, both from American and

European UFOlogy. These

included Jenny Randles, Paul

Devereux, David Clarke, RobertMoore, Ralph Noyes, Hilary

Evans, John Keel, Budd

Hopkins, Bill Moore, Jacques

Vallee and Philip Mantle.

Since its demise in 1993

following the death of Stuart

Smith and the temporary

retirement from ufology of

Roberts and Clarke, there have

been numerous requests for

UFO Brigantla to be revived.

Flyingsaucery.com will host new

UFO Brigantia items as well as

archival material and occasionalrants from the Armchair

Ufologist.

http://www.flyingsaucery.com /brigantia.htm 22/10/01

http://www.flyingsaucery.com/brigantia.htm

http://www.flyingsaucery.com/brigantia.htm



. ~e

Out of the Shadows

UFOs, the Establishment & . the official Cover-up

Out of the Shadows: UFOs, the Establishment & . the official Cover-up is the new UFO book by David Clarke and Andy Roberts,

published by Piatkus in 2002.

Out of the Shadows takes a fresh look at the subject of UFOs, focussing upon the British Ministry

of Defence's investigations into the phenomena since 1940. Clarke and Roberts have spent two

years researching the book and have uncovered hundreds of previously unseen MOD documents

relating to UFO activity in the UK.

The book sets the MOD policy on UFOs alongside the beliefs and attitudes of the British UFO

community and the wider media towards both the subject and allegations of an official 'cover up'.

Out of the Shadows is not a sceptical book, nor is it written for 'believers.' We see it as a social

history of the flying saucer/UFO phenomenon in the UK. It objectively traces the development of

official interest and investigations into UFOs and reaches some startling conclusions.

Among its many and varied contents, the book features:

• Important new material on WWlI UFO sightings and investigations

• Hitherto unseen Ministl)' of Defence and RAF files on UFO reports by service personnel.

• Interviews with and comments with numerous individuals who have worked at the highest

level of governmental UFO investigation

• The MOD file on the Rendlesham Forest UFO case of 1980

• New information on the Men In Black mystery

• The involvement of the Royal Family, aristocracy and politicians in UFO studieS

http://www.flyingsaucery.com!soon.htm 22/10/01

http://www.flyingsaucery.com%21soon.htm/

http://www.flyingsaucery.com%21soon.htm/



F ly in g S auc ery Page 1 of 1

The Rendlesham Forest UFOcase is, with the sole exception of the Roswell Incident, themost talked about UFOcase in the world. Numerous books, articles and TVshows havebeen made about the Rendlesham Forest event and tens of thousands of hours ofresearch has been conducted.

Many people have speculated on the depth and nature of involvement by the uK government inthis case and the 'Holy Grail' of Rendlesham has been the 'official ' Ministry of"Defence file on theevent. During the course of research for No Defence Significance? this file was located andobtained.

For the first time in the world you can now discover the UK government's secret f iles on theRendlesham Forest UFOcase. You may not agree with the UK governments' attitudes to the case -but you cannot Ignore them.

Here we present David Clarke's commentary on the file, placing it in context, with links to selecteddocuments.

Questions or media enquiries should be directed to: dave.ciarke@flylngsauce!)l.com



http://www.flyingsaucery.comIRendleshamlindex.htm 22110/01

http://www.flyingsaucery.comirendleshamlindex.htm/

http://www.flyingsaucery.comirendleshamlindex.htm/



Flying Saucery

•Page 1 of 1

I ! O I:/~f:

Five documents relating to the alleged UFOLanding at RAFWoodbridge in 1980are nolonger a secret following a landmark decision by the MOD'sDirector of InformationExploitation.

The decision marks a further breakthrough in our understanding of the events in RendleshamForest.

Five documents were with-held from the original file under exemptions to the code, 2 underExemption 1 (national security) and 3 under Exemption 2 (internal discussion and advice toministers less than 30 years old).

We immediately lodged an appeal against the decision and an internal review has now beencompleted. A senior MODofficial has now released the two documents that were with-held on thegrounds of national security.

The new documents contain no evidence that a cover-up of a UFOlanding ever existed. Theysimply illustrate how claims of a cover-up arise from secrecy for the sake of secrecy, part of anestablished tradition in Britain.

What they reveal is that the RAFwere making checks on radar records for 29 December 1980,following information supplied by Lt Col Charles Halt in his memo to the MOD.

As we now know the actual date of Halt's sighting in Rendlesham Forest was the night of 27/28December 1980. This implies incompetence and complacency on behalf of the MOD,who did notsee fit to make further inquir ies into the details they had beensupplied by Halt.

To see the MODjudgement, and copies of the newly released documents, cl ick on the links below...

MODJudgement Document 1 Document 2



http://www.flyingsaucery.com/Rendlesham/news.htm 22110/01

http://www.flyingsaucery.com/Rendlesham/news.htm

http://www.flyingsaucery.com/Rendlesham/news.htm



Untitled Document rage 1Vi s:

f milIi!I r,~¥t ~

4i!RITAIN'S SECRET'X-FILES' REVEALED

David Clarke and Andy Roberts

The Ministry of Defence has always denied involvement in any official study of the UFOphenomenon. But filesrecently discovered in Government archiva reveal how in 1950 the MODset up a secret committee of scientistsand intelligence experts to investigate sightings of 'flying saucers'. The report they prod!Ked for WinstonChurchill's Government remained secret for 50 years and even today certain sections remain classlf"_ because

of their intelligence content.

During research for our forthcoming book on the British Establishment and UFOs early in 2001 copies of the historic report

produced by the British Flying Saucer Working Party in 1951 were provided by a MOD source.

Wir'l~>ton Churchill

The full story of the Working Party and the stories of the high ranking MOD and

RAF officers were involved in the first and only official British study of the UFO

phenomenon will be revealed in our book: OUT OF THE SHADOWS, published by

Piatkus in 2002. What follows is a summary of the context in which the report was

produced and why its discovery is a major event in the history of UFOlogy.

At the dawn of the 21st century it is claimed that slghtings of UFOs have become

so few and far between that one of the oldest groups of civilian enthusiasts, the

British Aying Saucer Bureau, have announced they are closing down. While recent

opinion polls show 50 percent of the public believe we have been visited by aliens,

the Ministry of Defence have always denied they had ever taken the subject

seriously.

Fifty years ago, at the height of the Cold War, the situation was radically different.

Sightings of 'flying saucers' made newspaper headlines every day on both sides of

the Atlantic. The now defunct London Sunday Dispatch even described the subject

as "bigger than the Atom Bomb Wars." By the summer of 1950 with war in Korea

and the successful testing of the first Russian atomic bomb adding to growing

international tensions, the Western powers were growing increasingly worried by

the 'flying saucer' mystery.

Across the world, nervous fingers hovered above the buttons that could trigger a devastating nuclear exchange. Those

entrusted with weapons of mass destruction had only seconds to decide if an unidentified 'blip' tracked by radar was a

Russian bomber, guided missile, or simply a "phantom." Whether they existed or not UFOs, quite clearly, had the potential to

trigger a Third World War.

Solving the UFO problem became a priority for the top brains in the American CIA and their British counterpart, the MOD's

Directorate of Scientific Intelligence (051). Itwas the Defence Intel ligence staff that were responsible for assessing any

threat posed by UFOs. The DSI advised the Joint Intel ligence Committee who ultimately answered to the Prime Minister.

Throughout the 1950s the Ministry of Defence tried to calm public fears by debunking 'flying saucer' sightings as meteorites

or weather balloons, but behind closed doors they had already launched their own secret study, drawing upon the expertise

of the greatest scientific and military minds of the day.

Documents discovered hidden In the archives of the Ministry of Defence, reveal how a team dedicated to the study of flying

saucers was set up in October 1950 working closely alongside the CIA who were involved in their own top secret study. The

very existence of any "official" study of UFOs had been long denied by the MOD. Even when the minutes of this non-existent

committee came to light In 1997, the report it produced could not be found. The document, we were repeatedly assured, was

"absent" from the catalogue at the Public Record Office. Staff concluded it "had not survived the passage of time." . The

report constitutes the "Holy Grail" to those who have always believed that the Ministry of Defence were involved in a cover-

up of UFO evidence. It is also an important jigsaw puzzle piece in the history of the Cold War.

The papers reveal that the "Flying Saucer" study was the brainchild of one of Churchill's most trusted scientific advisors, Sir

Henry Tizard, best known for his role in the development of Britain's pre-World War Two radar defences that proved so

decisive during the Battle of Britain. Tizard felt the saucer sightings could not be simply dismissed as delusions, and

demanded an investigation of the subject following a pro-saucer newspaper campaign backed by one of the most respected

figures of the day, Lord Louis Mountbatten. Mountbatten and a number of other highly placed officials - including Battle of

Britain mastermind Air Chief Marshall Hugh Dowding - had privately concluded that flying saucers were advanced craft from

outer space.

The Flying Saucer Working Party had five members, representing the eli te Technical Intell igence branches of the Air Ministry,

Admiralty, War Office and Ministry of Defence. It held its first meeting in October of 1950 in a room at the former Hotel

Metropole In Northumberland Avenue, just yards away from Trafalgar Square. As a result, personnel serving with the RAF

and Royal Navy were asked to submit sighting reports for Investigation.

After eight months of sifting through hundreds of X-Files from as far afield as New Zealand, the committee concluded that

only three originated from trustworthy sources and were worthy further study. In June 1950 a pilot on patrol from RAF

Tangmere in Sussex sighted a "bright circular metallic object" which sped past his Meteor jet fighter at 20,000 feet. As he

was undergoing a debriefing by squadron intelligence it emerged that four RAF controllers at an air defence radar station

near Eastbourne had, at the same time, tracked an "unusual response" that vanished from their screens, moving at terrific

speed.

http://www.flyingsaucery.comlmod/rnodcoml.htm 22110101

http://www.flyingsaucery.comlmod/rnodcoml.htm

http://www.flyingsaucery.comlmod/rnodcoml.htm



,T.bft U:@{iW&ment$

.. pandh~

• mmentall'V

* Page 1

~ Page 2

http://www.flyingsaucery.com/mod/comleft .htm 22/10/01

http://www.flyingsaucery.com/mod/comleft.htm

http://www.flyingsaucery.com/mod/comleft.htm



U n title d Docume nt _L _::. ......__

• atII= r;mrt ~

The RendleshamMoDfile: Some Preliminary Thoughts

Jenny Randles

The release of this file to David Clarke in May 2001 is of considerable interest,

given the prominence of the Rendlesham Forest case in UFOthinking. But It alsohas great significance in terms of other modern British incidents - for we mightnow hope to get better official information on them without having to wait 30years and find re-investigation badly compromised.

ThiS recognition may be more important long term than the release of the files on a casethat was already of diminishing import in terms of scientific UFOevidence - as obvious from'The UFOsthat Never Were' written two years before this file was released.

However, Rendlesham has held - and will still hold - a vice-like grip on most UFOlogistsbecause it offers them the lure of being 'the big one' - a single case that could change theworld. And so any information that helps to illuminate the path towards resolution is to be

welcomed.Yet, of course, whilst this file does not add much to any resolution of the case itself, and, itwill always be arguable whether it even reflects the sum total of official knowledge on bothSidesof the Atlantic (with some no doubt suspecting hidden files may yet lurk somewhereunannounced) it is of great value. This is especlanv because of the picture that it paintsabout the approach of the MoD's public visage to UFOinvestigation.

There are no great surprises in the image that it portrays. But there is great interestbecause we now have clear, on the record, data from the MoD that all sensible peopleshould accept as being truthful - at least within the purview of those compiling the reports.

Indeed - I would submit - these records would not be untruthful. They may not be complete

(indeed the MoD have admitted to withholding some files) but they will be honest. The MoDsimply would not lie on open record. It would be too potentially destructive for anygovernment caught doing so.

Ralph Noyes - himself a senior figure in the MoDwho dealt with UFOsand who ran DS 8 atone point in his career - taught me from our various discussions that if the powers that bedo not want to say something then they do not lie. They just don't say it. If they do say itthen you canconfidently assume that it is basically true.

As such it is proper that we consider this MoDfile not as offering untruths but as providinggenuine painters towards what happened.

Here is a summary of the key things that seem to emerge from the new information andmy thoughts about them - based as yet on only a study of the summary. I will probably addmore when I examine the full report.

1: The dating of the Events

There is no Question in my mind - and has not been since one of the three originalwitnesses (John Burroughs) told me this in 1989- but these two events occurred inRendlesham Forest in the early hours of 26 December and overnight on 27/28 December.

There were other minor sightings at other times (many caused by airmen who were aware

of the gossip from around base and so went skywatching in the forest determined to see'the UFOs' forthemselves). But the Rendlesham legend revolves around these two nights.

http://www.flyingsaucery.comiRendlesham/comjenl.htm 22110101

http://www.flyingsaucery.comirendlesham/comjenl.htm

http://www.flyingsaucery.comirendlesham/comjenl.htm



U n tit le d Docume nt

.anyone clings to any other posSibility they are wrong to do so.

For a decade the above simple truth was not thought to be true. Even when the Woodbridgepolice claimed a different date for the initial sighting in late 1983an~ when 1~ound ~ veryearly note by Brenda Butler which confirmed that her source (the stili mysterious airman .Steve Roberts) had initially told her that it occurred on ~6 December (but then changed thisclaim to the following day) we were reluctant to accept It because the weight of other

evidence argued against.

Primarily this meant Colonel Halt's insistence about his mem?, compiled (~.e assumed) fromwitness statements but in reality from his memory alone. This was so posmve that thedates were 27 December and 29/30 December. And he was backed by other witnesses(such as Larry Warren) then willing to go on public record.

This reliance upon false information was a serious problem for the investigation. Itcompromised not only efforts to obtain information from the authorities (Brenda Butler andDot Street asked Woodbridge police to comment within weeks of the sighting but askedthem about the wrong night and so were never told about the police suggestion that thelighthouse was visible from the forest as the might otherwise have been).

Italso meant that we dismissed more readily than we would otherwise have done Ian

Ridpath's theory that the initial light in the sky was a bright meteor. One of these wasvisible on the night of 26 December and could have triggered a misperception. Yet,

officially, the sighting didnot happen on that night. Ithappened on the next night when there was no meteor. So, ofcourse, we tended to be skeptical of this idea in the early years.

The MoD file shows that the authorities were equally thrown off the track by thisfundamental error. They had the wrong dates to check out and so any study was prettymeaningless. Itwas not even realised by the MoD as quickly as it was by UFOlogy sinceHalt and the British squadron leader Donald Moreland stood by the dates (as you mightexpect them to do) and sothe MoD, again naturally, believed trained military personnel and their contemporary

records. .Itcannot be underestimated here what a simple error did to this case.

It is hard to appreciate why this cock-up happened, if the events were significant. Haltcould have studied the signed witness statements and the correct date was in the base logbook (the blotter). So why wrong dates were imposed onto the case and then allowed tostand firm for so many years is always going to be a contentious issue.

I da,resay some skeptics might contend that it was preferable for UFOlogists and witnessesto rid the spectre of explanation by standing by a false date. But I was really glad to havethe ~ates sort~d out in 1989and it started the slow process towards resolution. UFOlogistsare, In the main, here to solve cases and not to perpetuate mysteries. And - do not forget-

it was one of the original witnesses who clarified the correct dates for me - withouthesltatlon - so this hardly suggests that there was a plot to obscure the damaging truth,

No the prob.lem with the dates - seriously misleading as it was - occurred through anapparent mistake rather than any devious plotting.

Th,iSwas the ~irst cock up to inspire beliefs about a conspiracy - many of which persist tothls,day. But It wa,snot the last and it is a great shame that the error was not spottedearlier because this case may have unravalled long before it did - since the correct datesare the key to finding answers.

UFOlogy long did not have these dates. And nor, we now know, did the MoD. Both paid the

price for being innocently mislead - until the story had become a legend amidst its ownphenomenon.

This is an object lesson to all people involved in UFOstudy - including the MoD, Check and

http://www.flyingsaucery.comIRendleshamlcomjen1.htm 22/10101

http://www.flyingsaucery.comirendleshamlcomjen1.htm/

http://www.flyingsaucery.comirendleshamlcomjen1.htm/



U n title d Document

- double check basic information. One simple error can have a knock on effect and literallyfleak years of havoc.

I should add that this is not a unique circumstance. A similar error occurs in an Irishmilitary file released (via IUFOPRA) in late 1997.This described a mid air encounter betweenan Irish transport plane and a UFOat 1.10 am on 31 March 1993.The same event waswitnessed over the southwest of England by numerous people and was followed up byBUFORAwithin hours. I was acting as Director of Investigations and it was, withoutquestion, the result of a misperception of the burn up from a Cosmos satellite.

However, the official Irish military file on the case contains a second sighting backing upthe transport plane incident. This was by a Captain Cotter at Newcastle, County Dublin.From his account there cannot be any serious doubt that he saw the same thing aswitnesses across the British Isles. Yet he clearly dates his sighting as 1.10 am on 28 March- three days to the minute too early - and this was seemingly accepted by the authoritiesbecause he was a credible, military witness and had signed his statement within hours.

You would not expect a military officer (here based with the Naval Support Squadron) tomisrecall a sighting so soon afterwards and get the date wrong by three days. But here, ifyou decline to accept that this is what he did, you must assume that something remarkablerecurred in identical Circumstances 72 hours apart.

Far more probable is that he got this date wrong and so we face the consequence ofknowing that if you were to make assumptions based on that error - as many did withRendlesham - you risk misjudging the entire case.

Dates clearly are vital and we now must always be aware of how they can mislead us.

http://www.flyingsaucery.com/Rendleshamlcomjenl.htm 22110101

http://www.flyingsaucery.com/Rendleshamlcomjenl.htm

http://www.flyingsaucery.com/Rendleshamlcomjenl.htm



Registered File Disposal FormMOD Form 262F

(Revised 9/01)

FILE TITLE: (Main Heading - Secondary Heading - Tertiary Heading etc) Reference:

\ . . J '0 oS ; - 'f e:.~ lS."E:. .C'JC (:_o~~~'tbN~ . ;;\~~(_~~\~'\-\:!.\.\..'D~ C) C'-'f\~~ Part: ~ • 1

PROTECTIVE MARKING (including caveats & descriptors):\:) c, .

I Date of last enclosure: \ ~ ,,~ '" C ) .. ._ c a \ . . I I Date closed:

<:

PART 1. DISPOSAL SCHEDULE RECOMMENDATION FOR DEFENCE INFO(EXP)-R USE ONLY

(To be completed when the f ile is c losed)

V

I I I I I Iestroy after years DDate of 1st review Date of 2nd review Forward Destruction Date

Forward to INFO(EXP)-R after __ years DReviewer's Reviewer's

No recommendation D Signature: Signature:

PART 2. BRANCH REVIEW

(To be fully completed at time of file closure) • ~

(Delete as appropriate) ....

a. Of no further administrative value and not worthy of permanent preservation. DESTROY IMMEDIATELY (Remember that TOP SECRET Dand Codeword mater ial cannot be dest royed local ly and must be forwarded to INFO(EXP)-R.

(i) To be retained until the end of the year. 2010 for the following reason(s):

V V

LEGAL D DEFENCE POLICY + OPERATIONS DCONTRACTUAL D ORIGINAL COMMITIEE PAPERS DFINANCE/AUDIT

~

MAJOR EQUIPMENT PROJECT DDIRECTORATE POLICY OTHER (Specify) D

PPQ= 100 (Continued overleaf)

(il) Key enclosures which support the recommendation are:

(iii) At the end of the specified retention period the file is to be:

V

Destroyed Ii

Considered by DR for npermanent preservation L._j

V

DPART 3 ot below C2/equivalent)

Of no further administ rat ive value but worthy of consideration by INFO(EXP)-R for permanent preservat ion.

PART 4 DESTRUCTION CERTIFICATE

c.

::' .• ! l~ . : - 1 1

Signatu

Name:

(Block Capi tals) .,' J

Grade/Rank: _~_1_ Date: _ _ _ _ ! _ _ _ ! f _ j q I (} ,

Branch Tit le and FUI IA

D A S

ISO

Tel No:

Produced by MOD, DSDA(PC) KY Tel. 01179376256

I t is certi fied that the speci fied f ile has been dest royed.

Signature:

Name:

(Block Capitals)

Grade/Rank: _____ Date: _

Witnessed by (TOP SECRET' and SECRET only)

Signature: _

Name:

(Block Capitals)

Grade/Rank: Date: _

'(FOR DR USE ONLY)

t..clrnn In?17;C17~ 111("'~



Ministry of Defence

Room 8243

Main Building

WhitehaU

London SWIA 2HB 12 March 2001

Your reference: DIDAS(Sec)/64/3/11

Thank you for your letter of 9 March 2001 and for the information relating to the three

UFO policy files.

Once again I am grateful that you have been able to locate and review these files on my

behalf Accordingly. Im enclosing with this letter a crossed cheque for £20 made out

to 'MOD Accounting Officer' in advance payment for photocopying and postage as

agreed. If the cost of the work exceeds this amount please let me know.

In the meantime, I look forward to hearing from you with regards to the issues raisedin my letter of 7 February.

.; ...-



From:

MINISTRY OF DEFENCERoom 8243, Main Building, Whitehall, London, SW1A 2HB

Telephone (Direct dial) 02072182140

(Switchboard) 02072189000

(Fax)

OrO Clarke Your Reference

OUf Reference

DIDAS(Sec )/64/3/11

9 March 2001

Dear Dr Clarke

We have been sent the three files mentioned in my letter of2 February that contain, broadly

speaking, policy material on the subject of'UFOs'.

The files are:

AF/419 - BBC2 Man Alive Programme - UFOs

AF/S 4F(A ir)/422 - UFOs - Radio Oxford Programme

S4F(Air)U/506 - Statistical Analysis of UFOs

These files have now been reviewed and are ready for photocopying and a very small amount of

sanitising. The review, involving reading all the documents on the files, has taken us some 4

hours and has been conducted free of charge under the Code of Practice. Photocopying and

sanitising the papers is estimated at 2 minutes per whole document - in practice some will take a

little less time and those consisting of a number of pages, rather longer. We estimate that this

work will take some one and a quarter hours. At a charge of £15.00 per hour, the total cost is

likely to be £20.00. Would you let us know that you are content to meet this charge and we shall

send you the material as soon as possible.

With regard to your letter of 7 February, that raised a number of issues, I hope to be able to writeto you very shortly.

Yours sincerely,



•

1 March 2001

Loose Minute

o Info(Exp)R/3/7/8

.~.6).

Head Air Historical Branch

Copy to:

DAS 4a 1 (Sec)

ENQUIRY FROM DR D AV ID ClARKE

Reference:_ email exchange 12 & 15 February 2001

1. We recently exchanged email on the subject of Forms 541s (their non-survival).

The enquirer, Dr Clarke, has now written seeking information about the

Neatishead GCI (attached).

2. You will note that Dr Clarke has been advised "by a senior MOD source" that such

a record "would not have been destroyed and that even if this had been the case,

a record would have been made .." Clearly the MOD source is not familiar with

MOD regulations relating to the retention periods of destruction certificates.

However, I would welcome your comments about the fate of this type of record.

3. The query re Air Ministry 001 (Techr-records needs no comment (it's a well



,

e

Dr David Clarke

-eputy Departmental Record Office

Ministry of Defence

3-5 Great Scotland Yard

London SWIA 2HW 8 March 2001

Your ref: D IN FO (E XP )R J317 /8

Dear_

Thank you for your letter of27 February 2001 replying to my question with regards to

the absence of Forms 541 from RAF records during 1956. Far from being disappointing, I

found your reply helpful and the information you provided will allow me to channel my

research into more fruitful avenues.

Whilst the information you provided explains the absence of daily records for Squadrons

and RAF stations for the period I am researching, it does not account for the absence of

records for the Neatishead GCr radar station relating to this period.

According to the testimony of the retired senior RAF Fighter Controller who was on dutyduring the night of August 13-14, 1956, he personally completed a detailed logbook

record relating to the scramble and attempted interception of an unknown target detected

by the USAF GCA radar at Lakenheath.

He informs me that a representative from Fighter Command at Stanmore visited shortly

after these events and removed the Neatishead Gel station logbook for scrutiny by the

Air Ministry. As the incident recorded by the logbook involved both a radar tracking and

the 'scramble' of two aircraft from the Battle Flight, it would seem improbable that the

Gel logbook would have been destroyed.

I am informed by a senior MOD source that records such as the Gel log relating to anevent as important as this would not have been destroyed and even if this was the case, a

record would have had to be made recording who ordered and authorised such

destruction, and for what reason.

Despite extensive searches of the PRO records I have been unable to locate a file-relating

to Neatishead Gel covering the relevant period in 1956. Records do exist for Sector

Operations Eastern Sector and the 271 Signals Unit, Neatishead, but these do not contain

the Gel station records. As public records outside the 30 year rule these should be

available for scrutiny at the Public Record Office.



. .

e

Additionally, according to the information provided by the retired RAF Controller, a

report on the incident I am researching was prepared for Air Ministry by the technical

intelligence section DDI (Tech) during 1956-57. Records created by DDI (Tech) appear

in the PRO files for the period 1940-45, but none appear to be available post-1945.

I would be grateful if you could provide any information regarding the survival, present

location and public access arrangements in respect of 1) the Gel station logbook from

RAF Neatishead radar for August 1956 and 2) files created by Air Ministry DDI (Tech)

relating to the period 1952-58.

Your assistance is greatly appreciated and I look forward to hearing from you (SAE

enclosed).

Yours faithfully,

. .



, Page I of 1

DAS4A(SEC)

From: Info(Exp)-Records1

Sent: 12 February 2001 12:1

To: Hd of AHB(RAF) /

Cc: DAS4A(SEC)

Subject: ENQUIRY FROM DR DAVID CLARKE - FORM 5415

Dr Clarke is an enthusiastic researcher into unexplained aerial phenomena.

He is researching an incident which occurred between 0010 hours and 0330 hours GMT on 14

August 1956. when an unidentified radar track was recorded by the GCI radar station at RAF

Neatishead.

Apparently aricraft from 23 Sqn were scrambled from RAFWaterbeach to intercept thisunidentified radar target. Dr Clarke has traced the pilots and navigators of both aircraft and have

copies of their personal logbooks which confirm these dates and timings.

But in trying to confirm these details from records at Kew ie ORBs (AIR 27/2742, AIR 29/2631and AIR 25/1 555 -6). he has drawn a blank.

He has been given to understand that the information he seeks would be on Form 541 (theappendices!). Some earlier 541 s (1947) are located at Kew and contain the kind of information

he seeks, but those for 1956 are not available.

He asks if those for the periods of interest survive, jf so where are they and are they available to

researchers?

·12/02/01



Page 1 of 1

DAS4A(SEC)

From:

Sent:

To:

Info(Exp}-Records1

12 February 2001 12:17

Hd of AH B (RAF )

Cc: DAS4A(SEC)

Subject: ENQUIRY FROM DR DAVID CLARKE - FORM 5415

Or Clarke is an enthusiastic researcher into unexplained aerial phenomena.

He is researching an incident which occurred between 0010 hours and 0330 hours GMT on 14August 1956, when an unidentified radar track was recorded by the GCI radar station at RAFNeatishead.

Apparently aricraft from 23 Sqn were scrambled from RAFWaterbeach to intercept thisunidentified radar target. Dr Clarke has traced the pilots and navigators of both aircraft and have

copies of their personal logbooks which confirm these dates and timings.

But in trying to confirm these details from records at Kew ie ORBs (AIR 27/2742, AIR 29/2631

and AIR 25/1 555 -6), he has drawn a blank.

He has been given to understand that the information he seeks would be on Form 541 (the

appendices!). Some earlier 541 s (1947) are located at Kew and contain the kind of informationhe seeks, but those for 1956 are not available.

He asks if those for the periods of interest survive, if so where are they and are they available to

researchers?

12/02/01



.. - - . . . . .

Ministry of Defence

Room 8241, Main Building

Whitehall

London SWIA 2HB

) ,

Dr David Clarke

7 February 2001

......• ...........JI

Many thanks for your letter of2 February and for the results of your review of UFO

policy material from the period 1968-1981. I note your comments concerning the

process by which 'policy' material was distributed across files created by the

Secretariat, and the problems identifying this material within a range of subject files.

I was surprised to hear that 'a number of files' dealing with UFOs were likely to have

been destroyed in 1990. Itwas my understanding that a policy decision had been

taken during 1970, on instruction from an Under Secretary of State, to preserve all

files relating to this subject. Has there been a subsequent change of policy, or does the

preservation of files relate specifically to UFO reports, rather than UFO policy

documents?

Despite the above, I was pleased to hear that you had identified three files containing

policy material from the period specified in my request, including the file AF/419

relating to the 1972 BBe2 Man Alive Programme. I appreciate the effort you have

made to locate these documents and to review them on my behalf, and I look forward

to hearing the results in due course. I would of course wish to obtain copies of the

documents concerned when this review is completed.

With regards to my request for access to more recent policy material I would like to

take up your offer to search files if I was able to specify "a particular year, topic or

incident." My research into the MOD's involvement in the UFO issue during the past

half century would not be complete, or comprehensive, without making reference to

the saga of the "Rendlesham Forest/RAP Woodbridge" incident which occurred

between 26-30 December, I980. You will no doubt be acquainted with the details ofthe alleged 'sightings' by US airmen and others at the RAF Woodbridge base, which

has generated sensational newspaper articles, books and a number of letters from

members of the public addressed to your Secretariat ever since that time. Last year the

claims resurfaced yet again in a further book entitled' You Can't Tell the People,' the

subject of questions in the House of Lords as recently as last week.

My review of the MOD's public statements relating to the Rendlesham case since it

first received national publicity in 1983 have led me to agree with your original

position that the alleged events had "no defence significance." Having visited the

forest and observed the optical effects created by the beam from the Orfordness



f)«

lighthouse, I am inclined to agree that a completely down-to-earth explanation is

readily available. Wherever the truth may lie, my interest is in the process whereby

the MOD reached their original decision, and how public statements on this issue

have been interpreted by the media and others who wish to promote fantasy rather

than reality. In order to understand the decisions taken, it would be necessary to have

access to the briefings upon which your Secretariat must have relied in order to

answer both Parliamentary and public questions on this matter.

In a reply to a question from Martin Redmond MP in the Commons, the former

Defence Minister Nicholas Soames said the original report from RAF Woodbridge

was "assessed by the staff in my Department responsible for air defence

matters ...[and] the judgement was that it contained nothing of defence significance"

(24 July 1996, Written Answers). In a reply to an earlier question requesting a list of

papers held relating to the case, Mr Soames said other than the report written by the

USAF deputy base commander "the documents held by my Department are internal

staffing papers and correspondence from members of the public relating to the alleged

events" (10 June 1996, Written answers).

As this 'incident' has been the subject both of questions in the Commons and the

Lords, not to mention the focus of numerous enquiries from the public and news

media, it must have generated a considerable number of Parliamentary briefings and

internal policy documents. In the Lords on 30 January 2001 Baroness Symons

referred to "surviving departmental records [which satisfy us] that nothing of defence

significance occurred on the nights in question." I would ask, therefore, if it would be

possible to carry out a review of the file/s which relate to this incident in order to

determine if these records could be released (in a sanitised form, if necessary) for use

in my research. This would enable me to place the MOD's public policy relating to

this incident into its correct context.

Finally, to bring my study fully up to present I wish to ask if it would be possible to

arrange a formal 'question and answer' session with a member ofDAS(Sec) staff, or

~ an appropriately briefed MOD PR officer to discuss UFO policy as it stands today. In

my journalistic capacity, I have discussed this subject with Squadron Leader~

~ring his duty on the RAF Press Desk, on a number of occasions and

aJWaYSOUndmy questions answered comprehensively and helpfully. The questions I

ask will be of a general nature, and I could supply a summary in advance if this would

be helpful. You will find that my approach to the UFO subject is generally in

sympathy with that adopted by the MOD. In my opinion no objective historian who

has researched the documentary evidence available at the Public Record Office could

arrive at any other conclusion, but I believe that the issue deserves study in terms of

what we can learn about a range of subjects from perceptual psychology to social

history.

In the meantime, thank you for your assistance with my inquiries and I look forward

to hearing from you in due course.

Yours sincerely,





•Ftle

From:

MINISTRY OF DEFENCERoom 8241, Main Building, Whitehall, London, SW1A 2HB

Telephone (Direct dial)

(Switchboard)

(Fax)I!'!!!: s g S l I S ! i a s ;

Dr D W Clarke Your Reference

Our Reference

DiD/lS(Sec)64!311

Date

2 February 200 I

Dear Dr Clarke,

Thank you for your letter of 15 January enclosing your cheque for £183.75 for the reviewing,

sanitising and photocopying work done on your behalf. The cheque was sent to Defence Records

with the request that a receipt be issued to you.

A review of material from the period 1968 to 1981 identified some eighty files. As a part of the

work of the Secretariat is to handle correspondence from members of the public, policy discussion

on how best to answer a particular letter has tended to be spread across the range of subject files

rather than appearing exclusively in designated "Policy" files. Starting by isolating only those

files with policy in the title we trawled through the Records area of the Department before

conducting a search of files still with the Secretariat. The conclusion of that search was that it

cz::appeared that a number of files are likely to have been destroyed in 1990; a few 'UFO' files

including policy volumes were among that number. I am sorry to have to give you this

disappointing news.

We have, however, identified three files that contain some policy material. One of those was the

AF/419 'UFOs' BBe2 Man Alive Programme' mentioned in your recent letter. I am now calling

for those files to be returned to this building. The room in which they are kept has been closed to

staff for some ten days for repair work but I am hoping that Records staffwill have access next

week so that they can send them to me. I am not sure how many documents those files might

contain so I will not attempt to estimate how quickly we might review and photocopy relevant

material. I shall however write again once the files have reached us.

In your letter of 15 January you also refer to more recent policy material. As I indicate above,

policy discussion is spread over the series of 'UFO' subject files as well as being located' on

specific policy files but if you were able to indicate a particular year, topic or incident, we shall

conduct a search.

Yours sincerely,



•LOOSE MINUTE

DIDAS(Sec) /64 /3111Y

23 January 2001

Info(Exp)- Records 1 -

CHEQUE FROM DRCLARKE FORWORK UNDERTAKEN

~o

1. Please find attached a cheque for £183.75 from Dr.Clarke for the material you kindly

provided, plus a copy of his covering letter to

2. I would be grateful if you could arrange for a receipt to be sent to Dr Clarke.

DAS(Sec)4ala__ MB8245



• _ .. . - . ~ .~

Dr David Clarke

Ministry of Defence

Room 8243

Main Building

Whitehall

London SWIA 2HB 15 January 2001

Your ref: DIDAS (Sec)64/311

De~

Many thanks for your letter of 5 January. The parcel containing copies of the files I

requested arrived here at the end of last week, and in return I enclose a crossed cheque

made out for the amount agreed. Itwould be helpful if you could let me have a receipt

specifying the work done for use in my end of year accounts.

I wish to thank you and the staff who worked to process my request before the holiday.

Your help is very much appreciated and the material you sent win be of great help as pan

my ongoing research, which will acknowledge the assistance the MOD have provided.

With regards to my request for copies of "additional UFO policy files 1968-81", I look

forward to your response when this is convenient. Having reviewed the contents of the

policy file AF/3459!75 I would certainly wish to see more recent policy documents, as

these are directly relevant to my research into the UK Government's official position on

this nebulous subject.

Further to the above, I wonder if you could include within the category "UFO policy files

1968-81 "a copy of the file AF/419 "UFOs: BBC2 Man Alive Programme" which I

believe dates from the year 1972. This TV programme is referred to in the 1970 file, and

is of interest as it appears to have been the first time an MOD spokesperson appeared on

British TV to answer questions on the UFO issue. I'm happy to leave to your discretion

what other files are deemed to fall within the terms of my supplementary request. This

will form the sum total of my request under the Code of Practice for Access to

Government Information.

With regards to my question regarding the location of the missing file DSIIJTIC Report

No 7. I'm satisfied that your staff have done everything reasonable to locate this

document, but it is encouraging that you do not appear to completely rule out the

possibility that it could have survived and may one day be found. In the meantime, I will



•continue to pursue other lines of inquiry to locate the document and if successful will

provide the MOD with a new copy for your records.

I look forward to hearing from you,

Dr D.W.Clarke



• Lloyds TSBChurch Street Sheffield Branch1 4 Church Street Sheffield South Y

30-97-51

• Pa y

Date IS J A ' - J v f \ e y»oo t



'#'" ""

.':".

.> t, . , " ~~,~~

.i..!!!!II! ---~Room 8243

Main Building

Whitehall

London SWIA 2HB

Dr David Clarke

15 January 2001

Your ref: D/DAS (Sec)64/3/1

De~

Many thanks for your letter of 5 January. The parcel containing copies of the files I

requested arrived here at the end of last week, and in return I enclose a crossed cheque

made out for the amount agreed. Itwould be helpful if you could let me have a receipt

-'-? specifying the work done for use in my end of year accounts. ............_..

I wish to thank you and the staff who worked to process my request before the holiday.

Your help is very much appreciated and the material you sent wili be of great help as pan

my ongoing research, which will acknowledge the assistance the MOD have provided.

With regards to my request for copies of "additional UFO policy files 1968-81", I lookforward to your response when this is convenient. Havin~1i\ the contents of the

policy file AF/3459175 I would certainly wish to see mor~blicy documents, as

these are directl relevant to my research into the UK Government's official position on.' -"__ . . . . . ._

his nebulous subject.- - - ,_.....---._,~

Further to the above, I wonder if you could include within the category "UFO policy files

1968-81"a copy of the file AF/419 "UFOs: BBC2 Man Alive Programme" which I

believe dates from the year 1972. This TV programme is referred to in the 1970 file, and

is of interest as it appears to have been the first time anMOD spokesperson appeared on

British TV to answer questions on the UFO issue. I'm happy to leave to your discretion

what other files are deemed to fall within the terms of my supplementary request. Thiswill form the sum total of my request under the Code of Practice for Access to

Government Information.

With regards to my question regarding the location of the missing file DSIIJTIC Report

No 7. I'm satisfied that your staff have done everything reasonable to locate this

document, but it is encouraging that you do not appear to completely rule out the

possibility that it could have survived and may one day be found. In the meantime, I will



Dr D.W.Clarke

continue to pursue other lines of inquiry to locate the document and if successful will

provide the MOD with a new copy for your records.

I look forward to hearing from you,

Yours sincerely,



Telephone (Direct dial)

(Switchboard)

(Fax)

From;

MINI OF DEFENCERoom 8243, Main Building, Whitehall, London, SW1A 2HB

Your Reference

Our Reference

OiDAS(Sec)64i3/1 y-Dale5 January 200 I

Dear Dr Clarke,

Thank you for your letter of 2 January enquiring about progress photocopying the material you

requested.

The task was finished on 21 December, the material reached this building between Christmas and

New Year and is now being packed for posting to you. I am not sure how many days it may take

to reach you and so, although I shall have a copy of this letter placed in the parcel. I am also

sending a separate copy to keep you informed.

You will receive the contents of:

AIR 2/18564 (PRO reference)

•AIR 2/18873 (PRO reference)

AF/S84 (MOD reference)

AF/3459175 (MOD reference)

A number of 'UFO Irelated documents on files DEFE 3119 and DEFE 4411have also been

photocopied and accompany the material listed above.

The work has taken 16 hours and 15 minutes to complete and, as indicated in my letter of 6

October, the first 4 are free of charge. The remaining 12 hours and 15 minutes, at £15.00 an hour,

result in a cost of £ 183.75. I would be grateful if you would let me have your crossed cheque,

made payable to 11Accounting Officer MOD", once all the material has reached you.

I apologise for the fact that I am still not able to reply to your request concerning the "additional

policy files 1968-81". If, by the middle of next week a response early in January seems unlikely I

shall let you know.

Finally, in your letter of 1a October, you asked about the possibility of a further search withinMOD files for DSI/JTIC Report Number 7. Unfortunately, there are not the resources to

undertake a full search of files stored in the MOD archives, which seems to be what you have in

mind. However. Records staff have, in recent years, seen many files in the course of an



accelerated review of records closed for more than 30 years and reviewed DIS material more than

20 years old. As even this extensive work, along with more recent searches, has failed to locate

Report Number 7 the opinion, that it has not survived the passage oftime, appears very

reasonable. Perhaps your other lines of inquiry have been more successful.

Yours sincerely,



~ .. .1 .-'- ~ "

MOD Form 329D

" . . .- M I~ U'STRY; O F DEFEN'CE

..... t.

. I. ATTENT.ION IS' DRAWN TO THE DIVISION

NOT~,S ON THE INSIDE FLAP

2. ENTER NQ!ES OF RELATED FILES

, . ON PAGE 2 OF THIS JACKET .FOR REGISTRY USE ONLY_ _ . . .-

I f f ' > <

SUBJECT

J..I.N.J..o..~N:l.f..f..L~ . f . ~ Y . 1 . N . r . ; o . & : r .€ . c . : :r s . .: : ;. : . f . O '! . , L C .y ..

.A 'N .Q e .~ . U ~.y . . s :1 . 'J ; ) . 1 .& . t1 .G .~ 1 . . s . : i .

••4•••• ~~••~•• 'U4 ••• ~.. ~•••••• ~••• ~••• ~••••~n••••~••••••••••••4••••••• 4U•••• ~...U••• 44•••~••••• 4••• 4•••••••••••• 4~••• ~••• 4....... 4••4~••••• 4••••••••••••••••••

DATE Referred to DATE

. • _ ' . . . c . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _Lo _ . , _ ~

/

;

) USE ONLY DOWNGRADING

(to be completed as necessary. and In any event when the file goes out of current use)

(i) This file may be downgraded to U N C LA SS IFIED 00 : :: ... (insert dare) .

,.... .•r-.



• ANNEX TOSOP 502

I'

REPORT OF AN UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT

~

I A · Date, Time& '

Duration of Siqhtinq

Description of Object

B. (No. of objects, si~e, /; ) '\shaee 2 col,ovr 2 br~rtnessEt n ._ ·_ ), ~ ivdl .Exact Po ait ion of bserver .'

C. Location, indoor/outdoor,. •

stationar y/movingHow Observed {Naked eye,

D. binoculars, other optical

device, still or movie lDirection in which object first seen

E. (A landmarkmay

be more usefulthan a badlx estimated bearing)

F. Angle of Sight(Estimated heights are unreliable}

-G. Distance{By reference to a known landmark)

Movements(Changes in E F &' G

H. may be of more use than estimates

of course and S2sed}

J .Met Conditions during Observations

(Movinq clouds. haze. mist etc)

Nearby Objects (Telephone lines,..

high voltage lines, reservoir, lakeor dam, swamp or marsh, river,

K. high buildings, tall chimneys, steeples,

spires, TV or .r-edio masts, airfields,

generating plant, factories, pits or

other sites with floodlights ornight lighting) .

To Whom Reported (Police,

_ ..

L.military, press etc) -

M . Name & Address of Informant-

" i

N .Backqr-oand of Informa.nt

that mayi be volunteered! .iI·

. -~. . . . . . . - .·1

o . Other W~tnesses

P. Date, Time of Receipt

._---_.-

,.

, '

'4



•

,,

',i

' I . I

Detailed Met Repor t ,{AEGR"to Obtain}

R..

1..' Aircraft ~

2. Ranges.

3 " Gliding.

4. Balloon.

5. Air Sea RescueActivities.

" ,

Date ~• ill .

. , .

Copies to:

S4f(Air) I . , f ,ir"S-" 'F-Ge6 v,/..-/

Ops{GE)2(RAF )DI55 'i

g.r....et)G! i

Science A 3 ,I

File AFOR/~2/502

. A-2

"., -.:": ' ; _ . ' _

. ',,"":

, - : :~'.',. . . •-.,', .. -'"

"

,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . e o • • • • ~ . . .

Squadron Leader

Duty Operations OfficerAF-GR.(.R:A:P)·



/ ~'~om·.~...I/

iVlti41STBY Of: DE!':~NCE

Main Building Whiteha!l London SW1A2HB

Telephone0'1-218 (Direct Di<lHir.g)

01-21 S 8000 (SwhchbOClrJ)

-----------_._-----Your reference_

Royal Hollm'lay Col.LegeEgham HillEghamSurreyT \ i 2 0 osx

OUf reference

l J f ' / C X 8 0 / 7 0Date

30 July 1975

I,-,

I apologise for the delay in ansHerinv your request for access te : theNinistry of Defence files on Undderrb i.f i.ed 1?lying Objects - the mor-eso as I must send a d: Lsappointing reply.

\'Ie have given a good. deal of thought to t)lis proposal but I am forcedto the conclusicn that tYTO diffic1J.l tles stand j11 the way. Firstly:;the correspondence bebreen the Depar-tmen+ and member s of the pub.l.Lcon this subject has al'loTaysbeen treated 2-S confidential, and -thereports could not be mads avaf.Lat-Le unless eV6TY single piece ofpaper ',o;ere edited to r-emove the i.denti ty of. the observer ~or hiswri tten 'peTmissj on 1!'lE)reobtained to diV:)_~i..gehe informatj_on he had.provided. This in itself 'would be a forl.:~id.able task and, vha.Le I

have every confidence in your assurance that the anonymity of~-:i118sses ~irould be respected, I cannot evade responsibil:l. ty forinad.vertent.disclos'llTI3.

JiIore impor-tantly , the files wou Ld have to be expurgated ofV.d.nistry of Def8ace ccmmerrtaz-Le , For obvious reasons, " ' r e have to,s.atisfy ouz-aeLves that x-sports of ' 0. ?O shave no im plic at io ns for th8defence of' the country and OUT advisers naturally draw on classil::.edj.nformation 'i.here this Eight be relevant to a specific report undaz-discussion. Here again there is a ChD.ilCe that somethi:r..g might slipffirJugha:nd this is a risk I cannot afford. to ignore.

I am.very sorry I cannot be more helpful ''but Ie-an. asaur-e you vehave not treated your r-equest lightly.

Yours since:-ely



•eaS E HIUUTE

34(Air) (N r Peduzie)

C opy to: - D C S (R U' )

UFO R_ ,);]C O RDS

Reference: p:g/OX 80/70 -d.ated 6 June

1. D C S (R A F ) has asked me to reply to your minute at reference.

2. The R oyal holloway C ollege 'team' which comes in practicefrom RHC,Kir~Ts College, London and National Physical Laboratory,seems to be a group of academics drawa together by an interest

in UFOs. It vou.Ld be difficult to distinguish it from any othergroup of academics whLch might be dravn together by a commoninterest 1 of vlhich there could be many, and t~erefore r do notBelieve that it c an be described as ' a roa4or scientificorganisation of high standing'. For thisVreason I suggest thatthe request be turned down,

3 . I also have some reservations about the objective of thestudy. It is described as 'obtaining data concerning rareatmospheric events, such as IIball-lightnL"rlgn. ~ ... for lJ_seasmaterial for a .scLent LfLc ccnf'er-enc e on Li.ttLe=und er-stocd aerialphenomena".. Dr Christop~er Evans is an applied psychologist

who has "!ritten books on topics such as sc Lerrto.l.cgy, Subbudand other fringe activities, and who also appears f:re'J~uentlyon TV and radio. It" therefore appears that the study mightrange .more widely'.than the brief description suggests. Ln anycase you wou.ld require nor e ihfOI'r:::lation before it could be called'strong scientific reason' for undertaking the work..

4. !fowever, r believe that sooner or Lat er somebody ,.Fill break

Ithis confidentiality barrier, and the data ~lill have to be

I sanitised. F ~ve you co.nSidered asking the Air Ristorical Branchip whether they could em.yloy a consultant to do this?

V " " .

1 1 J une 75 J E A H .q_,_~'tIS 0:r- T

A C S (G )R.A F



mLCS (RAF )

l~ I attaoh a copy of a lettel· f'Z-OlllRoyal Holloway College, Uniw::'sity of'

Loudon" in which they.§Ieek access to our UFOrecords.

20 We are not infrequently asked. by outside bcda es or indi 'liduals to"r permission

t o e x ~ m i n e o u r UFO r e p o r t s Dc U p to nOif these ha v e a l l b e e n I " . : - t ' u s e dn t h e g r o u n d s

t h a t a l l c o r r e s p o n d e n c e b e t l f . e e n · M O D a n d m e ~ b e r s o f t h ~ public i s regarded as .

confidential and. oould not be made available to public acru:r.iny unless the l·eport.swere edit.ed to , preserve the ancnymity of the l;'eporler or th~ obsel'"ver's per-....ission

wer9 obtained. It would also be necessary to examine all tile recol~ds to ensure

t~t no classified ir£ormation used in the course of inve~tig~ting reports was

inad'Jsrtentl_y releae'sd¢ 'l'he tiru$ and. et'fo,rt in this task vi9uld be formidable and

up to llOW we have taken the general line that reports should. remain closed untilthey became availabl-s larier the Pu.blio Record Acts after 30 years.

3 .. !-a.nisters ha vEl anncunced, hcwev6ro, that an applicationt. for 8COe.llS would beoonsidered on ita me.rita if'it came i"roma major scientific organisation of highstanding which had ~tx-ong reaSOf;.e for exaanrri.ngour reCOrdB., The question is

whether this concession should Oil extended. to the Royal"Ho:L\.jwayCollege, who are

t'/e!l aware of the Ministerial undel'taking. I do not think our files would helpthem - the M O D investigations go no £urther than the defence ~~plioationa - but theraw material could I suppose h&.vecbjectiye value.

4. I should be grate1"..ll for your views on the standing of' the Royal Holloway

College team as a "Major Scientific Organisationll and whether the relevance of the

UFO.reports to their enquiries can be cOlH~trued as a "~..!i reason" ..

5. I am sura we cen rely on your objective' advice. My h~e',rt qusi18 at the thoughtof the massive ed.iting that might have to be done and, with our overt.axed re scurce s ,I would not wish to embark on it unlees in your view it has r - : , demonstrable scientifio

value.

h JUll 75 ')<J~~J .A t r t .DUZIE

S!J.(Air)

.- ...~



• n.MN~STRY·OF DEFcENCEMain I3lJilding Whiteldl London SW1A 2HE~

Telephone 01-213 .

01·21.1 90QQ

(Direct Dialling)

(S\t1itchboard)

--",

.Royal Hol1way.ColiegEi

~ghamHill .''Eghanl

S~rrey

' lW20OEX

Your reft;nmr;o

"

Ou r re fe l e nee

AF/7464/72 fel ~d70Date 1

~ &>May 1975

X amwriting to thank you t:o.!'ycur recent letter about

unidentified. fly:i.ugobjeot reporta: this is receavangattention and V Ie l'1i11write to you again on thi3 subjeot<is"soon an possible.··.

Yours f'ai tht'ully

IiE M A C K E Y



•"

J?6yal Holloway College University or'London

]_)leas~.. reply to

Egham Hill

Egham

Surrey TW10 0[

Egham 6371

. Depar-tmerrt S4f(Air)'~lINIWcRY OF DE1PENCEwhitehall, London·SWl

Dear Birs

F urther to I ~ r ec erit.tele~hone.conver-sat f.on with Miss Jamieson of yo ur D epar-t-merrb, we a:ce .writing' to request that W r3 be'p8rmJ .tted to hav8,a0cess to t he D e pa rt me nt ' sf:1:L88 on Unidentifi!.~d_ 'Flyj_ng Object report s ,in the hope tha. t data might thereby be obtainedconcerning rare a+mospher-L c events, suc n as"ball-lightningH.

~~b8data'i1fOuld 'be used as material :for a . scien-ti:fic conference o n little-llnuerstood aerialp h r : ; n o m e n a ~ S b . Q u l d y o u r e q _ u i r e further i n f o r -mation, please let us-know.

This request is made·on the understandi.ng that"N8would respect t h e Department's poLLcy of'witness ancnynn.ty , You .may wish to iml_)osefur-"tb,erres-trictions, 8.1hotlgh we would p:eefer toberunhampe red by such so far as possible.

iIhanlc you i n an't L c i . p a t Lon o f y o u r c o n a.i.de r-at.Lon .of this req_uest.

- -_ - _~_ • L_ __• ~_ • ~



•.~ .

1I

III



')Mn/130/26/2

eLOOSE M INU TE

D I 55/40/9/1

M iss G J Jamieso~

Sl"f'(Air)Room S~35"ME

7 UFO REPORTSf

1 . I have ex~mined your UF O report 5 5 7/ 1 0/ 2 0 and have thefollowing comments. /

2 . T he time of the sighting is within 3 minutes of the time of"nautic al twilight" for that daY. T he sky also seems to have beencloudy. In late O c tober there c ould well have been a layer ofice crystals in the atmosphere which might have produced an halationeffec t from the sun' s rays. T he net result is the ap~earanc e ofa ttf 'a lsesun" such as is frequently seen in A rc tic regions whenthe sun is j ust below the horizon. I t of' tenappears udiamondshapedtl•

3. T hank you for ref' erring to the c hange in procedures. Ipropose that, under these C irc umstances, we should no lo nger rec eiveU F O reports routinelyo Any reports whic h are diffic ult to c ategorisec ould perhaps be sent to D I 5 5 b on a monthly baS iS , as has in fac tbeen happening. We would also welc ome rec eipt of your statisticsat whatever period you prepare them.

D R J W A L T O Nfor ADI/D I 55

I

\ '1



•DI55b~(Dr J"'alton)

I shcu Ld be gr<-.tet'~l f'or - any ccmnent s yeu csn :uake concern:

the UFOsighting reported in the attache\! folder 557/lC/2C.Enquiriea made by STeeC of Air D efence R adars have proved

negative.

2. You will wish to know that US of S (R.AF) hs s agreed tl-

ohange of pr~cedure5 i n de al ir~ wi~ correspondence f~

t be publ ic concern.ing UF Os) proposed in S4(.Hr) ' s L co aeminute AF/CX 80/70 of' 16 Deoezaber, and. reports received

e.fter 1 Januar;"- 1972 will be acknow Ledge d by S4.,"'CAir) i.." t.[

forr;: of the attached letter. You ffihy wiSjl to consider

't1'iether we should pel'iodically f'crwar-d 8.':ly cr' the reports

to your branch for perusal.

.to Jc.nuazy 1972~

/11M iss G J JamiesonS4."'(Air)M E E x t : 7 0 . 3 5



MINISTRY OF DEFENCEs:4-r(AirMain Building, Whitehall; LoNDON S.W.l

TeleplWne: wmtehaJ l 7022; ext.

OUf'reference: . A : F /CX80/70 .Your rl/lI1'ma: .

'. .'

,- .~

...~ Januar~ 1972. _

, .

S ir

UN I D EN T I F I ED F L YI N G O BJ EC T SReference A : A F/ X5 8/ 64 /S 4f(A ir) dated 29 March 1967

I n R eferenc e A guidanc e was given on the ac tion to be taken by units onrec eipt of reports of unidentified flying obj ec ts.

I am direc ted" to inform YQu that approval has now been given for~c hangeo f prQc edure in dealing with c orrespondenc e with the public about .reported UF O sightings. A ll reports will be examined as heretofore so thadefenc e implic ations, if any, may be investigated. However, with the·limited resourc es now available to deal with c orrespondenc e from thepublic on the subjec t of UFOs·, the D epartment c an no "longer undertake to

advise obser-ver-s of the probable identity of the obj ec t seen. It istherefore nec essary for I tem' rQ, whic h asks if a reply is requested, to bedeleted from the form on whic h reports are made. A ll reports rec eived byunits should, as in the past; be forwarded to A F O R for normal c irc ulationac tion. -

R eports will be acknowledged by S4f(Air) to the observer with a short pro-forma letter. . ,

Any enquiries from the press· should, as before be referred .atD the J ' tT inistryof D efenc e Press of' fic e. . ' I... . .

It will be nec essary to c ontinue to c ategorize reports where possible f' orthe D epartment' s rec ords of UF O s and the monthly summary currently .prepared by-HQS trike C ommand (S T C O C ) will therefore still be : t~quired.

··.I··.am S ir

Your obedient Servant,;

- .

·./tJf~,M ISS . G J JAMIESON

To: "Air Officers Commanding-in-ChiefStrike Command'Aii Support' CommandM aintenanc e C ommand.T raiiling C ommand - . " '.

Copies to:· AFORDPR(RAF)DST1

Ops (GE) zc (RAP)A T S A 2- Mr· Ri c e



CODE 18-78

I AF/PS ~ j _ ~ .eference ......N." .... _.... .._ ..__ ~

~ »: e~S 4( Air) (Mr Davirl" M ' ~ o I? ._fGt.c,.....·_u---_

C opy to: D US (A ir) ~f~D of O ps(A D ef & 0) ( R A F )

~ s ~ fO ps (S) (RAF) f J J 3 1 ,

DR M et 0 /'DPR(RAF)_

UN IDEN TIF IED F LYIN G OBJEC TS - SUG GES TED

N E W P R O CE DU RE S

US of S (R A F ) is c ontent wi"th the c hangein proc edures proposed in your minutereference A F / CX 80/ 70 dated 1 6th D ec ember1971, and with the Proforma L etter asamended by D US (A ir) (attac hed).

(N .J. BEAUMONT)PS to US of S ( R A F )

3 1st D ec ember 1971



D R A FT PR O-FO R M A LETTER

I am writing to thank you for your report. of an unidentified

flying obj ec t seen on •••••••• ~ •••••••••••••••••••• ~ ••••••••••••••• ~ •••

We are grateful to .you for advising th~'D epar~inent of this

incident and your report will be examined in the Ministry of Defence to

see if there are any dEl-fenc eimplications. We c anno~ undertake to

pursue our research, other than for defenc e implic ations, to a point

where positive correlation with a known obj ec t is established, nor to.,

advise you of the probable identity of the objec t seen.. 'S"'~ ~...eo._o.k"'_'_:' 0-

~~Will no d01;tb~_wish to know, however, that the great ~ajOritY

UFO rep~ ~ fo ha...,e mundane expianatiena, the most common.

single sourc e being airc raft or the lights ' of aircraft seen under•

unusual meteorologic al conditions •. O ther c ommon sourc es have proved to

be astronomical sightings, spac e sate. llites or space junk, balloons.

unusual c loud formations or aircraft condenaat i.on trails. Investiga-

tions over a number of years haVE! ·so.farproducedno·evidence:that·UFOs, . - . . . . . -. .

represen~ 'an air ae:fence threat· to,:the··united Kingdom.. . I: ' . '~ ; . ' ; . . . . . . ' . ' { ~ . " . , : " ~ : : ; . ' . "

;." .....! .:

. ,," ..: . .. ~ .1 , "

i,:

~':

~ " , i . . . . . . , l,

--','r;"

: ~, ".' - "', . . ' ,,,.

•

, '." / ' . "

._ . ~.~''. '

. ~.' .

:" .. . . .

,. ('. . .,~ .' :...

.. '" ~"'

• ',I • , ~ :." ; '. r

~·.L'. ,,""" :,." .

.. .. '

. .

." .. '~. ',_

~. ,'. .

";,

... ,'



LOO.. }!IIWTE

A F / C X 0 0 / 7 0

ps/us of S (RA F) £through DU S (1U.rJ7

C opies to: A US (O )(A ir)D of OpS(A Det & O)(p~)D of OpS{S)(RAF)DST1D R M et 0DPR(RAF)

T J 1 g D R U T I : F I E l l F L :Y IN G .OBJECTS, ... SUGGESTED ~rl'id " P R O C E P U R , .; - r .; S

1• ' \ -Jhen the USAFannounced in December 1969 the termination of projectBlue Book (which was a special US unit set up to investigate reports ofUFOs) the l J f O D position concerning UFOinvestigations was. reViewed. Itwas decided early in 1970 that our policies and procedures for deallngwi th these reports should continue uncbanged.· (Flag C on AF/PS 26/70attached) • . ,

2.. In accordance with this procedure]IFO renorts are currently circu ....lated, either by S4(A1:r) or AFOR, to S'lCOCt oPS(GE)2(RAF) t STOIC andD155.. When1 is concluded that there is no defence implication it isour current practice to make an ,assessment of the 1denti ty of the o~J.!.etfrom available information; where the report is not Ukely to have «:originated from an aircraft movementadvice maybe sought from Met 09

if a meteorological ba.lloon might have been involved. or trom the ROyalObsex-vatory i.f a star or planet might have been the source. Wedo %lotpursue our enquil"1ee to a. point where a positive identification isestablished nor do we ~ne our c one 1usi ons 1~ the observer disa-grees With them. We do not investigate anonymous reporte. nor, no.rme.11y,reports forwarded by UFO·aasocia. tiens on behalf' &f third parties.

3. one o~ the factors ~eading to the decision in1970 to continue todeaJ. vith UFOreports inhis way was the need to answer questions :from .the public vh1ch might arise i'"romareal anxiety about national seouri ty e o

However, recent publicity given to the subject of" UFOs by the press andte~eVision bas resulted inan increased .volume of reports :from the public.Dur:l.ng the three months Augusi; to OCtober this year t 118 npor1is yerereceived- compared 'with ;6 inhe samtotperiod ~ 1970. 23 were receivedwi thin three days of the shoWing on telev:Lsion on 26th Oetober.o'£ analleged UFOfilmed at Enstone in Oxforde.hiret which has since b-eenthesubject of a Parliamentary Enquiry. SincE! the end of Oct.ober a singJ..eBanbu:ry-resident has sent to the Department 84 separate reports of UFOnsigh t1 .ngS" in the :Banbury area. !rhere is now preSBure for a respon-sible MODofficial to appear on a Me TVprograme to discuss UFOreportsand " T O ) ) procedures for handllng them.

4 . All letters and te1ephone calls during working ho urs c ono erning T J F O eare at present dealt with by a single BEO in S4(Air) who is occupiedalmost whole time on other work. Outside working hours calla are dealt

wi th by A.FORand aotioned bY' S4{Air} the next day. With the limited



(

res~ ~c es available in this D ivision. espec ially sinc e the recente st abli shm ent c uts, i t is recom.r:1endedthat time and effort should nolonger be expended in dealing with. tJPO reports beyond their circulationas detailed in para 2 , $0 that air defenc e implications. if any, may beexamined. Membersof the public would be advised that their report Will

be examdned for this purpose but that we cannot undertake to identifythe obj ec t seen. A pro-forma 1 etter would normally be used on the lineaof the draft attached t o this minute. .

5• If' US of S(RA.F)approves this proposed change in procedure 54 ( Air )

wil.l notify RAPCommands that individuals who report UFO sightings .shouJ..dno longer be asked whether they Wish to be advJ.sed of our find-iD.t.;'"'S. Wewould continue to categorize reports where possible for ourrecords and to retain the records of r~ports in the manner agreed inl'J8.rch 1970 ..

A. '" ~ .; t I / § ,

A 'C

·, ? , . ' , . .. . . .I F . . l . . .

~-.-',.-,.,.'-- .

- 2



D R A F T PR O -F O R N A L ET TER

I am writing to thank you for your report of an unidentified

flying object seen on ,.••••

I~eare. b-T"&tefulto you for adviaing the Department of this

incident and your report will be examined in the i'Iinis"try of' Defence to

see if there are any defence implications.. \-fecannot undertake to

puxsue our researc h, other than for defenc e implic ations, to a point

w here po sitiv e correlation with a known obj ect is established, nor to

advise you of the proba. ble identity of' the obj ec t seen.

You will no dO".J.btwish to know, however, that the great majority

6f UF O reports turn out to have mundane explanations, the most common

single source being aircra.~t or the ~igilts of aircraf"t seen under

unusual meteorological condltiona, Other commonsources have proved to

be astronomical sightlngs, space satellites or space junk" balloons,

unusual cloud formations or airc raft condensation trails. Investiga-

tions over a number of ye~ have so far produced no evidence that' uF Osrepresent an air defence threat to the United Kingdom.



I

Head of S.4 (J\-ir)ICopies to:

Reference .P L~§l.~*L1.?§j§. , ,..

AU S (O ) (A ir)D of O p s ( A D e f &O ) R A FD of O p s ( S ) ( R A F )DR Met 0

DP R (rur)ADI DI' 55 ,

U NIDENTIFIED FLYING- OBJEC TS - SU GGESTED NEW PROC EDU RES

Reference J J Y / c x . 80/70 dated 9th Deoember 1971•

I ha .ve no commen ts •

:IS Decemb er 1971 DSTI



• Reference .~.~ ~ " .

. ~~

c>:

~r4 f t . . - a ( O J . oft (f)S/-~) u - L

h - ~ ~r~& 6 4 1 - 0 ( ( ~

4 ' 1 - - . . 1 ' 5 ' 1 1- . . / 7 ! ~-~l- : J : j _ _ o J , r~ '4, 'f ~

r J . - r - 1 < r - ~ - ~ ~ (sj US,) 5(N#) ~. . . . . .

~ fA ~c.t .k~ f...d'-~-

~~M. . . , ~ c A . . . V - (J~ d t r r j -

fI?ol ~J . Q.~

4 S ' l f F-{ c v ) Ju Mol'k;. j~4vd;;:, t.,~ ~tk.- oW

~.

a . f - ' ! - ( i J v - k Jk c f t - 4 t - r>: ~ I " ,

~{:j_ ). ~ Awad. "£0 \, ~ _ k

~ !--~ 3 f /":" J . J . e . . t - 1 ' "

.~ ~, i~ r1 (loA)

k ~' l.>-( d .u-U ~- a p - s t ~ ~ "

• ~ - J : L . _ _ t " " ~u ~ < , r ; J .

~ aL<-(fo..cJ) • j J-IjrJ- ~- ~ ~

~A ~~ti.J {fW ~Li~ A ~ c 1 c'-V



LOOSE M:mJD

AFjcx 00/70

AUS(O) (Air)D of Ops(A De1' & O)(RAF)D of eps(S}{P. .A1P)DST1 .

DR :Met 0DPR(MP)

I attach aself"-explanatory draft minutewhich,subject to your comments",!propose to send toPS!US ~ S(R..\.F}. In the absence of any comment~om your Directorate by 1700 hrs on 15 ~em.berI shall assume yow concurrence ...

9 December 1971 A N DAVISS4(A:1.r)



j L OOS E J.IIN U TE

A F / CX 80/70

PS/US of S(RAF) [through DUS(Air17

C opies to: A US (O )(A ir)D of·~·Dps(A Def &: O)(RAF)D ot OPS(S)(RAF)D S T 1DR Met 0DPR(RAF)

UN!DEHTIFI ED FlY ING OBJEC TS - SU GGESTED NEW PROC BDU RES

1• \'/hen the USAFannounced in December 1969 the termination of projeci;

Blue Book (which was a special US unit set up to investigate reports of

UFOs) the r i l O D postlon concerning UFO investlga.t~on6 was reviewed. It

vas decided ear1y in 1970 that our pollcies and procedures for dealing

with these reports shouJ.d continue unchanged. The authority of the

then US of S(RAF) was recorded inthe papers .associated With Parlia-

mentary Enquiry AF/PS26/70, which were e1roulated to copy addressees

under l.oQ~e minute AF/X58j64 dated 24th March 1970 (not to AU5(O)(Air).

2. In accordance with this procedure UFOreports are currently oircu-

lated, either by S 4(Air) or A Fa R , to STeoe, O ps(G E)2 (R AF ), S TC IC a n d

D 1 5 5 . When it is c oncluded that there is no defence implic ation it is

our current pract1 ce .to makJ an assessment o:t the ident1 ty ot the

object from available informat1~nJ if the report is not l1ke1yto have

originated trom an aircraft movement advice m a r be sought fiom Met 09. -

if a meteorologi cal .balloon might have been 1nvolved, or from the RoyaJ.. . . - .. .

- .Observatory 1£ a star or planet might have been the source. 'de do not

pursue our enquiries to a point where a posi tive identification is _.:,

'\established, nor do we re-examine our conclusions if the observer disa-

grees with them. \Ie do not investigate anonymousreports, nor J

normal.ly, reports forwa.rded by UFO associations on behal.f of third

parties.



3 . O ne of the fac tors ~eading to the dec ision in 1970 to c ontinue to

deal with UFOreports in this way was .~he need to answer questions

. :tromthe public which r:rl.ghtarise from a real anxiety about national.

secUrity. However, recent publ'-c.1ty given to tho subject of' UFOsby

the press and teleVision has resulted in an increased volume of reports

trom the pubUc. .x",u:'1,nghe three months Au.uo-usto October this year,

1 1 8 reports Yere received compared with 5 6 in the same period of 1 970.

23 were received within three days of the showing on television on

26th October of an alleged UFOfilmed at Enstone in Oxfordshire, which

has since been the subjeQt of a Parliamentary EnquirY- Since the end

of October a single Banbury resident has sent to the Department 54

separate reports of UFO "sightingsn in the Banbury az-ea,

.,~:4. A ll letters and telephone calls during working hours concerning

UFOs are at present dealt With by a single BEOin S4(Air) whose primary

responsibilities are as follows:-

Co-ordination of RAF aspects of MODwar Book.

C o-ordlnation of N AT O A ~ert measures with G o v e r n m e n t , w a r Book.

Supervision o~ clerical work of Air Force Board and standing Com-

mittee.

At present the MOD1'lar :Book1s being entirely rewritten .;tn .1l.Iie with the

!fAro Alert eye ter: ~d _tlJ.e ,REO1s concerned almost whole time with this

work.

5. With the limited resources available in this D1Vision, especially-

sinc e the rec ent establishment cuts t 1 t 1 s r-ecozanended that time and

effort should no longer be expended in dealing with UFOrepo rt s beyo nd

their circulation· as detailed in para 2t so that af:r:def'ence implication

if any, may be examined.~ : < ~

!·Terc.bersof the public would be advised that

their report will be examined :for this purpose but that we cannot under-

take to identify the object' seen. A pro-forma letter would normally be

used on the lines of the draft attac hed to this minute.

- 2 -



6. If. US o~ S(RAF) approves this proposed change in procedure S4(Air)

will notify RAFCommandstha.t in future individuaJ.s who report UFO

sightlngs should no longer be asked whether they wish1 to be adVised of

our findings. We would c ontinue to categorize reports where possible

for our records and to retain the records of reports in the manner agreE

in NAi'oh 1970.

-'_



DRAFT PR.O-FORP~

I amwriting to thank your for your re:"Jort of an unidentified

flying object seen on ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

We are" grateful to you" for advising the D epartment of this

incident and your report will be examined in the ~anistry of D efenc e to

see if there are any air defenc e implicaticns. I recret that we are

unable to extend our investigations beyond our defence interest. We

cannos therefore undertake to pur-sue our research to a pOint where posi·

tive c orrelation with a known object is established, nor to adVise you

of the )robable identi-tiy""b:f the object seen•.~~.

You will no doubt wish to know, however, that thegr-eat majority of

UF O reports turn out to have mundane exp~anations. the most c ommon

single source being aircraft or the lighteo! aircraft seen under

unusual. m.eteorological conditiona. Investigations over a number or yea:.so far

have/ produced no evidence that UF O s represent an air defence threat to

the united Kingdom.





," :~.., :.

. . . . .

. . . . . . -.':. ,_ . _.~.'.',, . . . .

. ' , ~ . .. ', ." ~ .. -.' . - ~.. : ::-J' ,

. . . ~ - : . ' _ : . f.. ",' , '.: :- . . , . ., , +.. .~ • ", ! .. .•'~~."-;. ~, : • .-

.'. Sir" John Langford"":'Ho'lt'1P : .<.»: ,~::",:. : ; ; < : , : . . ~ . , .. , _ . . ~ . , , ' . : " _ ' . ; ' . , i

.'. ~~~$e of C ~ ~ ~ . · / , r \ ; , . ' : " , ' . . ." ' ; .: . . " .' . :. ' > • . • . :. • . . • • .. 2 1 \ . . ' • . : . . • . .· : i :. . • . ·• • .~ay....•.,: : 7 F j } ! . ) . ~ ; . • . •• . .: : . · .. • . . .! ; : . "

. ". '. : : : :":. . '.< ';".,. .,... : :'. ." :... ~. ~. ":,;<. -:'". " :: '.' ~.,-~. .' ...•~.~.': .. ' .'.-.: .:' _.": e • ' . ' . "

. ' - . " , . ' • - . • . ' . . . . . • . . . : , : : . ; , • • 0 '. , ' " . . . . . , i-. , ; '. -, ,'. '. . . " : ;

. • ......, •. .';. r

,.'

., .'

,::. ..I,. . .~

J. I

. . . . . . . . : ~ t . .'. .. ~

: : _ . ; . : ' . , . ;Thank you for your letter of 6 May about ·instructions, within the:, ; iNational Air Traf.fic Control Services, for dealing with reports of; .' :'. ;tlllidentified .flying objects. " J

NATeS units have instructions that,' in the event .of a report' :..':.tconcerning an unidentifiedflyirig object, they should- obtain as much·······'~as possible of the information required t o complete. a prescribed .

·.report form. The details are to be' passed ~Y telephone to the parent :Air Traffic Control Centre (ATCC)~·.wh~lethe completed report form: ... '.is forwarded to the Ministry of .Defence. The A T C C is required to .. ' .give the details without delay to the Military Aero-nautical ;,: . · rInformation Service. . ' ... :.,.' .. ' .:'. f :

i

. :.'.. ' "-

These instructions were first issued in January 1968, and published in"the r1anual of Air Traffic Control.· .. I enclose copies of the : <'.

1

relevant pages from that Manual,. which include' the report form. . .:.j .

. . ..-.: ..

The NATeS does' not keep statistics o.f these reports once they have' < . J .been passed on in this way; but I understand that Antony Lembton :./.:.).

has recently written to you. about reports z-eced.ved by his Department :':.> ..during 1970 •. I would suggest· th'?ot he may ·be able to supply simila~.:'··.'. in.formation for earlier .years' 'sl:iouldyou so ·wish,. andjam ·copyiri.g·" . :... :...' this .letter to him•.' ··.:..i· .' -:. . -: ,':' .'. . '. '. :":.~ :'> . . ..: ,'_

. .'.' _• I'.. .:.. ... ~ " .• .." .._. ~

" . . ' ', ' .~ ".<. • i ::~... .... '.';...... .. .·. . ' " . . . . . . : • • • • • v • . . . . . \ , . , , ' • ' . ' . - : : , , : : . ' ~ ' ( ~ ; . . . . . ' : • • • • • : • . e-,

l ' , " : - - : :. . . ; . ': . / : > " _ ; - , : " . . . . : : " , , · ~ O A J . . . i ~ ~ : ' ~ . . . ~ " . . ,0. :,': '., • .':::. :1."," . L .

" . ' . . ~ . · : ; , ~ . . . ; i ~~_Q ,< : /' . > : - t :• •• " • • ", ' ~I • . ., : __ • • •• ..•• . ; < " ~ .

' . . . ; " . ' . ' .i > . . . .; r ~ :< ' . " : . : ;: : ; . . . . : ' . ' ( : : : '> : " \ / ' : : ~ : : < ~ :· \ : i " : . ' . ; ~ } ' ; . ' . '. . . . : ' . , : ' { ; . : :

L .. ' __ '

: I .

;.

.....'

....:. _ ...

'......r. ,

. ' • . , j .

.' .: . , . _ . ] - : ' " ; .... .: '~" .. "_', .

. : .' ·.i.: ; ·.:(t.

. . . . . . .~..'



. .... ' . .

, ~

· ~ , : "•

.

.

.

\.T.C. A.T.e.I. No.2 Part 1-19_:;~.

\

_llmp/!!] ' S:-, j

. 5.5. Reporting of Unidcntiflcd Flying Objects

5.5.1. In the event of a report concerning an unidentified flying object being received by an ATS unit '.:,.th e following action shall be taken. ...~" ." ...

.: 5.5.2. The ATSU receiving the report shall obtain as much as possible of the information requiredto. complete the report form shown at Appendix UF" and pass all details by telephone to the watch

· supervisor at the parent ATeC

(ScottishATee,

Preston ATCCor

London ATCC). The "completed form shall be sent by the originating ATSU to The Ministry of Defence (AFOR),Royal Air Force, Main Building, Whitehall, London SWl.

· 5.5.3: The Watch Supervisor at the ATCC' concerned. shall pass all details without delay via the~ operational telephone network to -thc Military Aeronautical Information Service section at '. ~

\ - . ! c . - . \ ( ' J)t\-e.~;l.'tbJ::idp;;-:cxtcrysi~l1:tt. _ If it is ~eccssary to use the GPO network the information should be .: .,

passed to 'lftb71d!!c31-1:q\ extension "3llJ, ' ,S . - " ' " . . . ; . '

. 5.5.4. Such repo~~-4ihat1b7'~~tterialJthe A r c l o g . . . > .. . : .

s-~r» ,.

.....

.,", .

5.6.• Report ing of Aircraft Incidents and Breaches o f Regul at io n s

" ' . ',5.6.1. ·Aircraft Incidents

....:.'

· · · · '. · L ' ; . - . : '

. Au inciden t is an occurrence which, but for fortuitous circumstances, might have resulted in an:'·,", accident, and may be caused by: .

. , (a) Ground Organisation: ,

'. (i) equipment defects, faulty organisation and procedure, etc.; . " ';:'"(ii) personnel error, incompetence, negligence, failure to comply with instructions etc. .., ,lfit is thought that the cause of the incident may be attributed to ATC error, the ATCO i/c, .' ::. or in his absence the watch supervisor or senior controller on duty, will ensure that written. ". ..,. ...reports are made immediately by all ATC staff concerned and that a preliminary report is ... , ,-telephoned to the Divisional ATCO. Reports should comply with ATCI No.8, para, 6.3.3 .. ',.' .

(b) Aircraft-defects in .the aircraft or its equipment, loss of control due to meteorological. conditions, etc. .. ,. ,.

(c) Aircrew-s-negligencc, incompetence, failure to comply with procedures and instructions,.. incorrect practices and errors of judgment, etc .

'. 5.6.1.l. Minor Incidents (Form CA 163) .

'. 5.6.1.1.1. Minor incidents, such as errors i n navigation, use of incorrect procedures, ,,'faulty radio operation ctc., in which the safety of the aircraft or its occupants

, , is not involved,' shall be recorded on Form CA 163 Aircraft/Aircraft Radio :

'i' Operation Fault Report. The completed form will be passed to the Air ".Traffic Controller i/c, the Centre Superintendent or the STO. as appropriate, ,.' .who will review the. circumstances and decide whether or not reference to theoperating company is justified •. A register of such incidents will be maintainedshowing. the following informationt-e->, t.>. '. < / ; , . . ' . !. . .. . . . ~ .'. . '. '. ', :(a) Station Serial No. . .. ",. .(b) Operating agency .v - . . • . , . . . . . . ~ . . . .

. , (c ) Date of incident(d)Aircraft registration(e ) Date referred to operator(J) Brief details of incident(g) Dale reply received.(II) Summary of explanation.

. ; 5 .6 .1 .1 ' .2 ; A copy. of any Aircraft Operating Fault Report submitted .to an operator ..: ._ < . ' . . . .! . will be forwarded to the DATCO for information. : ..., -; ,

• j • •

,:, 5~6.L:i •. jncidents Involving Safety (Form CA 1260) .

,: 5.6.1.2.1. Incidents in which the safety of an aircraft or of any person is threatened other .':. - ;,., , .: .: than nod;:, :.."., accidents and airrnisses shall be recorded on Form CA 1260. '.::'" _

. Incidents o r U'dS nature which may in addition involve a breach of regulations' .:..':will be recorded on this form and on FormCA 939. The completed form, ':.will be passed to the Aerodrome Commandant, the Centre Superintendent, -.:. the Chief Officer 01' the Aerodrome Licensee as appropriate, who w ill decide . '

~.::

". _.'

. . . .

• • . 1

.. .

... '.

-. ~ : ',';

4 ',

... "

...,_,'.': .

•" ._~:. I

. ....

. :.• > ~

:,

. ,",.. :-,

."," i',/':

· '~ - < ' : ) · '- , -'0 : •

. Board of Trade'.

. . . ' .':~' ,,' ,'. - . , - .. ' -:. ' .. :': 10.11.69 '•.:., :~', .'.' :

. . . . . ..,: .'

,'. ,,'.",,'1 .:

'~'.: :: \:' - .. ' . "

;.:..~ .''~.~

. . ~"" "_., ' :



' ~ - ' , : l , r r_ -~ _ ~~"~

I. _:( -, , ,;. ,

whether the matter can be dealt with locally or whether it should be submitted .' .to higher authority for attention. His decision will depend on the degree of, ._" .risk .involved to other operations and to persons and property 01"). the ground. : < , .. . . }

Incidents recorded at ATCCs will normally be submitted by the Centre'. . . ./Superintendent to the Divisional Office for attention unless they can be dealt .',.'with locally without difficulty, Reports on all incidents on which local action. > .. has been taken will be forwarded to the Divisional Office for information.

.. . ..

'. '. 5.6.1.2.5. Where an arrangement exists for form CA 1260 to be prepared in respect of... ' .' . :.'. .. off paved area" incidents. the information to be provided by the ATSU

". will normally be:-

(a ) aerodrome, time and date;

(b) aircraft type and registration;

.". (c) direction and length of runway on which the incident occurred and, if this '. ' ..was not the runway in use, the fact should be noted. In the case of over-runs the state of the runway surface should be described, i.e, wet, dry,icy. etc.;

:;".. ~.: (d) particulars of the aircraft movement inquestion with a sketch plan to': ;:i show its ground track, including the' distances run off the paved surface "

and lateral displacement from the centre line of the runway or taxiway;(e ) wind velocity, temperature and barometric pressure•. Visibility or runway

visual range; weather conditions at the time, visual or radio apprcach v, ..'

procedure inuse and details of obstruction lighting; . , .

(i) State of unpaved surface at the time, including remarks as to the effect

thereon of the season or recent weather. .

. , .• - I" I

, '. '... '. .,.. 5.6.~.3.2. Notwithstanding satisfactory ground reports if a crew member of a subsequent, .;::. " ... "" .. , aircraft confirms the reported fault, the procedure shall be as foHows:-

'! (a) At ATCC's the STO after consultation with the Centre Superintendent,J ' will decide on one of the courses of action in para. 5.6.1.3.3. .;

." . :: .. ,.. r.... (b) A t a ero drome s, the STO after consultation with the Air Traffic Controller" , .ile will decide 011 one of the courses of action below. The STO will advisethe aerodrome authority of the action taken .

.(~) At non-state aerodromes the report should be given to the aerodrome. . ..'

licensee.. . . .....

. 5.6.1 .3.3. T he courses of action are:-

'p;.- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

A.T.C.I. No.2 M.A.T.C.

,.. "~ ::"

.,'."'.....

.'~ . .... _.

".:

' '

-,.'., .'.5.6.1.2.2, A transcript of th o R/T recording relating to the incident need not be made.: .. ' .' initially but one may be required later. Such R/T records will therefore be

. -.retained until the case is finally disposed of. > '

. : .S~6.1.2.3. Incidents caused by unexpected weather and incidents calling for a statement. . . of weather conditions will be referred without delay to the local meteorological

'.... office, or, where this office has only limited facilities, to the appropriate mainor parent office. .

5.6.1.2.4. Ar).yincident which it is considered might give rise to public interest shall be..,' . reported without delay to the Board of Trade Press Office, 01-222 7877

Ext. 2231, or 2684 (or Night Duty Officer 01-222 7877). .

I..

.. .

" - : .'., .. ~,,".

"':' . .;:

" u,

. . .'. " . ' ,.',

. " ....

.": " ".,<,

~ . '.' -.": .'-~ ..

;': -;: "

.':.'

;,'.5.6:1.3; Ground Radio Fault Report (Form CA 647)

; .: 5.6.1.3.1. When any telecommunications facility is alleged to be faulty by an aircrew. member, details will be entered on Form CA 64 7 where held and forwardedto the STO for attention.

, ., ,.:. ..

(a ) To retain the facility in operation as fully s erv ic ea ble •. '.,

(b ) To retain the facility with specified limitations:

(c) To withdraw the facility from service, .'

'I" .

, ;~. .

Board of Trade0.11.69., . , . . ' ;. ',.". ':.' .

" . :"-.

.... " . . . ..;j

' .. '.

t •

. . .

• " ~ • . • - '<

.~..; ; . , '. ", " ... -."

•. ,I

.' . , . . . .

.-.I ". '!'I " I:. '.,:. 'j : > • " , .

", , i:~~~ .:. : ~ . . '

',

.''., .

. .:: i :.

. ,, . . . " r

, : . : : , : : : . " ( : ) : ' .

c, ." ~. " '.~< •.

. ",

• 'Io{" '

:,',

,. ' ... ~

;.,.' '_ .

. . ,. . . . :

..'.

:_ ', . . ' ....:: ... :, '~' .• r , f •

.. . . " . ~.'.- ~. ,:: . " f_i

.. ;

:", ":';".

, ...'

"~ .. . . . ".;"

, '.

': ••J. ' .... '

\. ) .:~ " ' ; - " " " .

., ..

'. ',:.".' : . : ' .. . : . - : ) ' ."'\ .. ~ ~ . . . . . . . .~. ' . ~.

. ~ . . . . . : ~ ..; .

.: .!; ~'. .' . ' . . . . . .'

"., .. .~. '

.'

, .



,c ",

.. !

A.T.C.I. No.2'

..APPENDIX "1 "" . ", ', '. . . .

REPORT OF AL'l"Ul'>I'IDENT.ll{IED IfLYING OBJECT.:.

A . Date, Time and Duration of Sighting:

Local times to be quoted. .:

"

~..~ ".

I, "-.

-', .;',I'

.; c .

Description of Object ,

Number of objects, size, shape, colours, brightness; sound, smell, etc . .. ; . . ~ , . ~ . : . : ~ : ~ ~: ~ ~ : >.

Exact Position of Observer .. ,1.;;, .:.:

.Gcogruphical location, indoors or outdoors, stationary or moving,','. :'. . : I.I ... • • "•.

. 1,. . .. -'I }. .; . . . .. '.

. . .;,

- .. . : ". f - I" 'j ~

n . " ~ '" -e ,

~.

..,

• •~I':.~:..• I' '".

'. I"_ '~ : : •• ~ '.~ . : ~ - . > . - : I

. ,, ~ " ..' . :.. :.

. ..

~.' .....D. How Obs er ve d

N ake d e ye , binoculars, other optical device, still or movie camer~ ..~:_: ,. .' I,

·E.. : Direction in whlch Object was First Seen .

. . A landmark may be more useful than a badly estimated bearing.

.,

- " : - ' < ". ;.,

';- .

F . Angular Elevation of Object

Estimated heights are unreliable.

G.· Dlstauce of Object from Observer

By reference to a known landmark wherever possible.

." .... , . -~. .:·..i·;·

.. .

.) ,' .., \ ' : "..'.,~'.l·... ;..-/ ,1 •••. ,_~

.' :.v,

." .

-v , · ' > _ r . ''J'

. ~.;i

. -, -. : .':' .. ,. ':~~. " . ' - . ':

.-"i

1.! :

..

H.,'. Movements 'of Object .. ,..

Changes in E, F and G may be of more use than estimates of course an d sp ee d •... , . .

1 _ • •• • •

J . Meteorological Conditions During Observations

Moving clouds, haze, mist, etc.

~...~

'j'

Nearby Objects

Telephone or high-voltage lines; reservoir, lake or damjswamp or marsh; river; high buildings,' tall'.'. chimneys, steeples, spires, TV or radio masts; airfields; generating plant; factories, pits or other. sites '.

with floodlights or other lighting. . ...: .... . . .'> , .'.; ..•

;. ;.'- ....

. ,' , · 1 ..i'' . . .

'.: .

L . . To WilOm Reported

Police; military organisations, the press etc.

, ...I ~.,

.": '.:. . . . ~.

1,. :j "

':

I •;.~";

I.... i ~

M. Name and Address of Informant ,: '.j' .,'

. ':~-.: :

.: •.....i ~

N. AllYBackground Information on the Informantthat may be yoluntccrcd < ~, -. . .:~

.:' ,J:

'. ~ r.' . -',

o . Other Witnesses

..-: '

.., " ..'.. .';

. ':1- . - ••

p..• ',!.

Dnte and T im e of R ece ip t g f Report .,.:.•.:' : . . ' .' . - ".~.~ . .

Q. Is 1 1 Reply Requested? .,.

.,

I '-..

.'.-~ : ' .. ,: .'

'. . . ,- ~.' '. . :~..: .'

'.

~

..1' .~.:;

" '.

·i .. ': ,':~.. ,: :.... . . . ..~~

.:· .

.' ". -:.

. ~.~' ...~:'; .. = ."

.i,. •••••• ,

Board of Trade." .. . '

.. . . ".' .;. . . . ....

.~'

... - : . . . . . - . :~.'.'i . ".,."

· ." "\ .', '

'r; .,....

, .t·., .

;. "-..-'. ~",

. . . . . «. ': .. :

. ···l'

.~, '.' . ~ " . ."._4_~·"""""'_·""_-1"·""_"_~ __ ""lo,:lr"......,.", __ . . . .t ._.. , ._._ ..... ._.... .._,':""i"""" 46 -- ... """"'_ ~... -r'Y.---:--" c,"

; < ! , : , . , ' " . I~ ~ , i ' .J : · , [ i f : : h I ; .. . . . : . J t · : \ . " · ; ' ! ; ; , , · . \ ; r .~ : . \ . , : . , , ; . i ' · ~ l . :. ! : ' ~ ' : ~ : : . :,'. } . J , .

' . . . ' : : i 1 @ j . : < . . . . • ' i ' . . . . . .\'~'«i; ,

v • , : · · . ~ r A : ~ : t : ; L ' l. ' ; ' , : . . , ' . , . ~ , ;. , . ,. ... ' , ' , ~ J , . ! i , .; . . , . : . • • , . . : , . . . : : , ' .: ' . • . : . . . " : , . ;. : . ~ : . : . . ~ ; , : : I . :< . · " . ' . ' . · •' . " , . : l . , ' . . _ . : :~ . : .; I: , .· · '. " ·. ·: : :' :f ' ; : . .. : . .: ;. , . . .. ' .. . : . :. . •• .. . .. . l i " . ~ ,. . . . ._ ' : : : . " ' , - · ' : : 1 ] ; : U i ~ : : ~ . ~ I ~ · ; ; ? l · : : ' _ ' , " ,: . . . i I,. _ . ,.. _ , ~

r:

'r.



EMBASSY

OF THE

UNITED STATES OF AMER1CA

OFFIC E OF THE A IR A TTA C HELONDON

U-1397-70/AIRA 2 3 June 1 970

J

Mr. L. W. Akh ~ t(s4r (A ir» flsMOD, M ain Buildi ngWhitehall, S W . l

\.

D ear M r. A khurst: \ £~o.'/

R eferenc e is made to your letter of 2 5 February 1 9 7 0

requesting information on how the United S tates is

handling Unidentified F lying O bj ec ts now that Proj ec t

Blue Book is c losed. We have j ust had a reply from

the D epartment of the A ir F orc e and are enc losing the

information whic h they provided. Ihope this informa-

tion will be of some assistanc e to you.

1nc l~WARD W. HEMENWAYC olonel, US A F

A ssistant A ir A ttac he



DEPARTMENT OF TH~ AIR FORCE

WASHINGTON ZOllO•- OFFICE: OF THE SE;CRETARY

We wish to acknovledge receipt of your recent lnquir,y. Please ecceptthis form of response so that we may give you a reply w.ithout undue delay.

O n D ec ember 17, 1969 the Secretary of the Air Force anneunced the termi-nation of Project Blue Book, the Air-Force Program for the investigation ofunidentified flying objects (UFOs). _

, -

The decision to discontinue UFO investigations was based on an evalua-tion of a report prepared by the University of Colorado entitled, UScientificStudy of Unidentified F lying Objects;Tt a revie\! of the University of C olorado' sreport by the National Acaden~ of Sciences; past U F O studies; and Air Forceexperience investigating U FO reports dui-Lng the past two decades. -

As a result of these investigations and studies, and experience gainedfrom investigating UFO reports sinc e 1948, the conclusions of Project BlueBook are: (1) no UF O reported, investigated, ~qd evaluated by the Air Forcehas ever given any indication of- threat t o our national sec urity; (2) therehas been no evidence submitted to or discovered by the Air Force that sightingsc ategorized as "un.i.dent.Lf'Led" re present t ec h. .o lo gi ca l dev el opme nt s o r princ i-ples beyond the range of presentday scientific knowledge; and (3) there hasbeen no evidence indicating that sightings categorized as Ilunidentifiedlt aree xt ra te rrest ri al v eh ic le s.

With the termination of Project Blue Book, the Air F orc e r eg ul at io nestablishing and c ontrolling the program for investigating and-analyzingUF Os has be_e: p. rescinded, and Project Blue Book rec ords have been -transfer-red to the Air Force Archives.

, -

Attached for your information is the Project Blue Book sighting summaryfor the period 1947-1969. Also included is a listing of UFO-related materialsc urrently available through publication outlets of the federal government.

Your interest in the United States Air Force ,is appreciated.

Sincer>ely,

JA NES H. A I K 1 ' - L > \ N , -L t C olonel, US AFC hief, Civil Branc~C ommand ty R elations D 1visionO ffic e of I nformation

Atchs



./

,,

nAR TOTAL SIGHTINGS UNIDEl'lrIFIED

1947 122 12

1948 156 71949 186 221950 2 1 0 27

1951 169 221952 1 , 5 0 1 3031 9 5 3 509 4 21954 487 461 9 5 5 545 2 41956 670 141957 1 , 0 0 6 " 14

1 9 5 8 627 10

1 9 5 9 3 9 0 12,2960 557 1 41961 59 1 131 9 ~ 2 474 ·151963 399 1 41 9 6 4 562 1 91965 887 1 61966 1,112 321 9 67 937 1 91 9 6 8 375 31 9 6 9 1 4 6 1·

TOrAL 1 2 , 6 1 8 701

i ,.





, .

Extract from Wernher von Braun' s book F irst Men ,"to the:,M oon,

Copyright 1958, '1959, 1960 'by Dr·.,wernherY9n·.Braun,.,pub:lishe.d

by Holt, R inehart and Winston of Canade ,-L td. :0 '~"'. 'c'

"Question: What is your opinion on '. U: .F• . '6' 1" ,. -: ." ": _ , r "

.,c i .~~. ; :- .- : '3 , . .~ : - ', \ ~ ' L '. i . : " ,

"Answe~: T here is a rational' and 'r~th~r stralght-:forYard,.

e xp la .na ti o· n' fo r. t he g re at m aj or it y c r. ' ·a :i gh ti ng s, . of 'J mi de n-

tified flyi~ objects,' or 'flying., aaucer's 1.,;" as .they are ;~~L.~,

more familiarly. c alled. D uring the: last ten"years;ot' f' ic iaL Ju . S . i nve st iga to rs ha ve t abul at ed· l3 . po uj ;. ix t ho usand

sightings.' They could accourrt for. all but , t' WO. per-cent·as "".belonging to any of the following categories :" .~'~

High-flying balloons of various kinds . ..

High-flying ~ircraft illumina.ted by. the sun af,terthe sun -.: '

had s.et on the groundNightly' 'FataMorgana' type reflecttons in tne"atmosphere. of' distant light sources on the ground -,

Artificial satellites of U.S . or Soviet originM eteorites and fireballs

BirdsThe Planets Venus or Jupiter

Searc hlights illuminating cloud layersHoaxes perpet ra. ted by pranksters

Even the most ardent believers in flying objects of

extra-terrestrial origin will usually concede that most

reported 'Sightings' can be traced back to one of these

sources. But it is that unac counted two per cent that

makes enthusiasts cling tenaciO lsly to their conviction.

r cannot account for the mysterious two per cent,either. But a'lifetime spent with testing of guided mis-

siles has taught me to be extremely careful with eye-witnessaccounts on rocket firings running into some in-flight .trouble. Of three experienced observers questioned

after a typical mishap, one svore that he clearly

saw a part coming off before the rocket faltered; a second

hotly denied this but claimed that the missile oscillatedviolently before it veered off the course; while the third

trained observer saw neither a part coming off, nor anoscillation, nor any veering off the course but insisted that

the rocket was flying perfectly steadily until it was ab-

ruptly ripped part by an internal explOSion.

S uch contradictions in the eyewitness accounts of old

rocket men are by no means an exception; we are almo stinvariably confronted with this situation. Yet we aredealing here with experienced observers who not only

had seen many firings, but who had the great advantageof be1ng mentally prepared for the imminent test.



• ARRIVINGROM MARS BY UFO ?

:.,,','; _"".:; .

. ~ ,~ ': : , ; • -A " : ' _ i .-. . .

: l I I . r~e,qellt ye.rs ..here.have. been·~nyreports._of ·unidentified:· '/', .

fly1ngobjects( U F O ' sL '.specially since thet1rst·· Sov1et ..Bputni:kw.ent

up on October 4, 1957. Fromt1me.,to.time ::tne:_question has,beeni.ra1·sed·

as to whether the UF0.ia might have come from Mara or Venus, perhapsbear1ng-intellligent_ ,be ings·•.._.Usually. the answer to~hisj:~ue:st10IY has

beensiqlly a~sswhich·.4.epended .to .a .~consider&ble extent ,oh,.what ·.~the

indivi4Ual .wantedtobe11eve. ;>Most ac~eDt18tEl ;ha'leUbeeninclined,·,to',:,B?

dou'b::tthat .the JJ,C),s came from Mars or Venus/(pi"eferring.to"credit'the<~

sight1ngsto:n&tural·phenomenawhich'are not· &s wellknow.zt' as they:~shouldbe, '''' .,"\:_ _:.:... ~ "." - '~;" ' c , · . ' · · ~ , : : : ' l , -

. . . .

: " . : : ' . . . ' ~ , : ' _ " , ' - ' " . _ . . . . . . . . , : : : . ' 1 " .~ . ~ . ~ . - . ~ . : " : : ; ' _ s r J ' v -

..There .·l,s •. logj,cal 'appr:oach to. ,this' quest.t'Ol1as-",o.~whether:or.:n6ts

UFO's have come-trom Mars or Venus. It is· well .known that it s o m e .ene.»on the earth wants to send a space vehicle to Mars or Venus, there are

specific favorable times, times when a ..body can be launched so that it

will travel along a minimum-energy' orbit, arriving at the path of' Mars(or Venus) ..:lu~~n~s.}hat PJ.aJ:l.et",comes to the same pOint. For e~8:p?-J>le,favorable' tiinesl'or launch1ri.-g·s rocket to travel ·to Venus have been

listed as Oct 2 .7 '- 1 965, June.,5, 1967 and January il, 1969, ,and ,for H!ir.s,December 23, 1964, January'26, 1967 and February 28, 1969:' (S pA C E H AND-

BOOK, Gov' t P~1nting Office }~5.9 1 . ' , : : . " " _. . . . ' .

Of' course, there are sirni.1ar favorable times for J.a,~ch1_ng.a"spa,:~:vehicle from Mars (or Venus) 'tci the earth, and for each of these launch-ing times, ~re would be a .cqrresponding arrival t_1meat~the ear.th ...:,These favorable arrival time-scQme at intervals of 'about 584-ii&ysfor '.-

Venus and. about 780 days for .Mars. Actually, in each case ..1,the1nter.va1

is a close apprOXimation tcithe synodic period at the' 'planet;' for' ' V e n u s ' ,the synodic period varies trom.579· 8 to 587.8 daye ,and ;for :Mars"frqm.. ,767 to 803 daYs. ._ .... . '." .. ~ .' ·_-v

One could then choose ctiiterva1s of 20 days, say "tefi' d a y - s - c:h~:~it1~~side of a favorable arrivald.ate, and look to see howmany UFOt . .:were~.,sighted in each such ufavor~ble arrival interval" ,here ~d.~ feL:t.~"-~<:, •.

(Plural taia). It there vereno increase'in the number ot UFO's,in .~th~8efais} then it:"ould be unlikelY that any conSiderable number of tiFbt's"~'had been arriving trom Mars or Venus. ,. ,:";;.'

. : s O m e 'one 'is certain to raise the question as to wheth~r ..or not a

Martian or a Venutian "ould elect to travel in. a minimum..energy_."orbit.Here ISball assume' tbat'in~lligent'pe1ngs f r O m any ~part .otthe :universe

will 'choose. to traVel by m e a n s . and Pa~b8. ·~twill·minlm.ize, the .e,x.pendr;ture of energy., .~;.. . .. '-, "' '. .~, . .' ." ;. :.-~ >.:,:';

This fai approach to the problem can be"carried a' st~p farth~r •. :'.

One can make a list of the UFO's observed in the fais} and look at therecord of each to see if the UFOwas observed traveling in the direction

it would have it it came from Mars (or Venus) in a minimum-energy orbit.



AV 10 N·I C 5

Spectacular corona display along General Electric's experimental 500,OOQ·v.ransmission line near Pittsfield was produced byappltcat'on of more than 120% of rated voltage. Corona also is induced by dirt. salt crystals or other foreign particles on theline or insulators. An extremely high voltage gradient can develop across these, exceeding breakdown voltage of air.

Plasma Theory May Explain Many UFOs. By Philip J. Klass

Washington-Luminous plasmas of ionized air, a special form of "ball lightning"generated by electric corona that occurs on high-tension power lines under certainconditions, may explain many sightings of lower-altitude "unidentified flying ob-jects." It is related to St. Elmo's fire, sometimes seen on or near aircraft iri flight.If this theory is correct, it would explain the increasing frequency of UPO sight-

ings in recent years when there have been growing numbers of very high-voltage. power lines. Also there has been increasing atmospheric pollution whose contami-. nants.may playa catalytic role in the phenomenon.

Descriptions contained in a recentbook, "Incident At Exeter." appear tosupport this theory. John G. Puller, its

journalist author, interviewed dozens ofpersons who reported seeing. UFOs inthe vicinity of Exeter, N. H., approxi-mately a year ago.Fuller expresses the belief that top

Air Force and government officialsknow that the UFOs are extra-terrestrialspacecraft but have successfully keptthis a secret for nearly two decades toprevent national panic. But a muchmore plausible scientific explanationemerges when the Exeter sightings areanalyzed.

Most of the UFO sightings in theExeter area occurred along or very near

to .high-tension power lines, accordingto the author. The same is true of twoother 'sightings he investigated in west-ern Pennsylvania and others renorted atthe time of the Northeast power black-

.;

48

out last November. Fuller speculatesthat the extra-terrestrial spacecraft may

be attracted to the power lines as asource of energy for refueling their pro-. pulsion systems, . .

Electric corona, which this writer be-. lieves is the mechanism that triggers one·form of "ball lightning" under suitableconditions, is a moderately well under-stood phenomenon. But most scientificinvestigations of corona have beenaimed at devising means of suppressingit, rather than gaining fundamental theo-retical understanding.Ball lightning, most frequently re-

ported during or immediately followinga thunderstorm, is poorly understood.

Until recent years it attracted little scien-.tific attention, having been treated bymany as an "old wives tale." But in thelate forties and early. fifties, ball light-ning attracted. the attention of several

. .

top Soviet scientists, including Academi-cian Peter Kapitsa.Five years ago, several U. S. labora-

tories began to investigate the phenome-non, motivated in part by its possibleapplication to anti-ICBM defenses(AW&ST Dec. 4, 1961, p. 52). These in-cluded the Bendix Research Labora-tories, the Illinois Institute of Technol-ogy's Research Institute and Raytheon'sadvanced development group.There is a striking similarity between

the reported characteristics of ball light-

ning and the uros sighted by dozensof persons in the Exeter area, as re-ported by Fuller, who used a tape re-corder to insure accurate observationdetails. For example:• Color: Ball lightning is multi-col-

ored, but red is the most predominantcolor reported, followed by intense blu-ish-white and green. A vast majority ofthe sightings reported from Exeter saidthe object was red, while the remainderwere. either bluish-white, green, or acombination of all of these..Shape: Ball lightning normally is

either spherical or ellipsoidal with many

reports of a doughnut-shaped or ringconfiguration. The Exeter sightings weremostly round, oval-shaped or dome-

shaped. . .• Sound: Ball lightning is often ac-

Aviation Week & Space Technology, ·August 22, '1966



Ionized plasmas produced by electric discharge in laboratories of Illinois Institute of Technology's Research Institute severalyears ago show some of the characteristic shapes of UFO sightings. However, these pictures were made with extremely shortfilm exposure times of 0.2·0.5 microsec .• far briefer than the Lucci photo (below).

ompanied by a sizzling or hissingound. Exeter sightings reported that.he UFO sometimes made a soft hum-

ing or hissing sound.• Dynamics: Ball lightning has been

eported as hanging motionless at times,et able to move up, down and horizon-ally at extremely high speeds. It ap-:ears to move by rolling and gliding,ften along electrical conductors orructures and frequently exhibits a spin-ing motion. The Exeter sighting re-orts said the objects often hovered overfixed location, frequently power lines,ften rolled or bounced along, some-imes exhibiting a spinning motion andould then appear to zoom off at great .peed and disappear from sight. .

• Lifetime: Ball lightning reports in-icate that they can have a lifetime rang-ng from several seconds to many min-tes. Observers at Exeter reported that.bjects remained in view for a few sec-nds or as long as 15 min.• Size: Ball lightning has been re-orted in sizes up to 15 ft. in diameter. -xeter observers estimated the size ofbjects sighted at from the size of a ..

asketball to as much as 200 ft. in

This apparent size discrepancy is ex-ainable in several ways, A ll but two ofsightings reported at Exeter by

uller were made at night and one ofhe two occurred at dusk. The absencevisible landmarks for size comparisonould make it difficult for a layman totimate size accurately, especially whenhe object could induce fright in the

Additionally, the type of ball light-ing triggered by electric corona maye a [ower-energy plasma of larger sizehan that usually induced by lightning

Electric corona is a luminous plasmaby ionization of the air sur-

oundiug a transmission line .or one ofIs insulators. When electric corona

rst occurs, it briefly. resembles a smallroke of lightning. The corona canemain fixed or. cantrav:eL along the

Unidentified flying object photographed over high·tension power lines near Beaver,Pa., in August. 1965, by James Lucci with full mOOI")visible to the left of UFO, isbelieved to be a form of ball lightning Induced by electric corona discharge. Photowas taken using film with ASAspeed of 100, lens opening of f/3.5. set at infinity,-..and exposed for 6 sec. Film development time was 12 min.

.power line until cooled and extinguished . Transmission lines near the oceanby external forces. are also susceptible to corona becauseSo long as a transmission line and salt crystals deposit on the lines and.

its insulators are clean and suitably . insulators, according to A. F. Rohlfs,designed, corona does not normally, manager of high voltage development

., occur. But if small particlesof dust or : for GeneralElectric at Pittsfield, Mass.

salt crystals, for example, become af- Exeter is located only 10 mi. fromfixed to the line or insulators they can the ocean. The power lines of thetrigger the corona, according to Darrell Exeter and Hampton Electric Co.,Shankle, manager of field research in which were involved in the sightings,Westinghouse Electric's electric utility run right down to the ocean beachoperations, The reason is that an ex- beyond Hampton. The company's chieftremely high-voltage gradient develops engineer, Stanley Sawyer, says that .across the dust or salt crystal which corona occurs more frequently "whenexceeds the breakdown voltage of air. there is not much rain to clean off theEven.flying insects that alight on the lines."

line can trigger a corona. For example, A check with the U.S. Weather Bu-during the months of August and Sep- reau shows that conditions during the

ternber a very high-voltage transmission: summer of 1965 preceding the Exeterline in West Virginia experiences fre- . sightings in September were especiallyquent coronas caused b y "flying spiders" . conducive to corona in that area becausethat are carried by the winds and alight it was an extremely dry summer.on the lines, ..accorciingto"Shankle. For example, during the months of.

' ..

Iviation Week ",. Space Technology, August 2?, 1966 . ., 49

"'.:



e 'uly, August and September the Exeter..ea received barely more than half ofits normal rainfall. During these threemonths, there was only 6.0 in. of rain,compared to the average of 10.8 in.When corona first occurs, it usually

has a bluish color which can then takeon the color of a lightning strike, ac-cording to experts on the subject. But,

the presence of sodium-chloride (salt)on the line could give it a pronouncedorangish-red color from the sodiumwith a touch of green due to thechlorine. ,This suggests that some of the Exeter

sightings could have been no more thana corona discharge traveling along thepower line. Here are some of the first-hand observations described by Fullerin his book:• Meredith Bolduc: "This thing was

coming up the power lines toward theroad ... "

il lMrs. Jerline Jalbert: "We see it reg-ularly along here. Always seems to be,

, somewhere near the power lines."• Mr. Heselton: "Just the other night,

some other people saw it along another _,section of the power lines."• Mr. A. Reid Bunker, Sr. "We were

under the high-power lines ... when at10:45 p.m. we saw an object approach. . . It had red lights most, and sort ofgreen and white lights ... "

First Sighting

vided an unexpected opportunity foradditional evidence that indicates a reIa-,tionship between electric transmissionlines, and associated power distributionapparatus, and the type of object sightednear Exeter and Pittsburgh.A private pilot, Weldon Ross, was'

approaching Hancock Field at Syracuse,N.Y., for a landing "at almost the exact

moment of the blackout. As he lookedbelow him, just over the [34S,000 v- lpower lines near the Clay, N.Y., sub-station, a huge red ball of brilliantintensity appeared."This particular substation initially was

reported to be the "crux of the diffi-culty," Fuller writes.

Same Report

A total of five persons reported the,same phenomenon, including Robert C., Walsh, deputy commissioner for theFederal Aviation Agency in the Syra- '.cuse area, according to Fuller. ,

On Nov. 26, Fuller reports that apower failure in St. Paul, Minn., coin-cided "with the appearance of objectsoverhead giving off blue and whiteflashes .'. . Fifteen minutes later aresident on Hogt Avenue reported a'blue-glowing' UFO as all house lights

, and appliances in the area went dead." ,Fuller hints at foul play by extra-

terrestrial spacecraft by claiming, thatscientists have not been able to explainthe causes of the Northeast powerblackout or the simultaneous proximityof the UFO sightings. '

Engineers working with large-areapower distribution networks concedethat the complexity of such systemsmakes it difficult to pinpoint readily aspecific faulty circuit breaker. But no "competent expert has publicly advancedthe idea that the blackout resultedfrom external causes.

The first Exeter sighting on Sept. 3,1965, that triggered many, subsequent,

reports, made by a teenager and subse-- quently witnessed by two policemen,, was located near the 34,SOO-v. trans-mission line of the Exeter and Hampton. Electric Co. The line is mounted on

'. 'wooden poles approximately 29 ft

above the ground. In total there were '73 instances, Fuller .writes, where per-

, sons reporting UFO sightings near Exe- ' V It Ster used the words "power lines" or" " 0 age urges

"transmission lines" or referred to loca-" During conditions of such power net-tions near power lines. : , .work • instabilities, there are voltageDuring the period in which Fuller was ' surges at some points in the network.

researching the' Exeter incident, he These higher-than-normal voltage con-visited Beaver, Pa., near Pittsburgh, to ditions would induce very large coronacheck' UFO reports. One night sighting discharges.

, during the previous" month near high- , The leakage current during coronatension power lines had been made by contains harmonics in larger than usual17-year-old James Lucci and two friends proportions, creating an inductive effect'and Lucci had managed to photograph which aggravates network instability.the object (see photo, p. 49). But only to this extent could the coronaWhen Fuller and Lucci visited the or corona-induced ball' lightning have

area of the sighting and he was asked to contributed to ,the blackout problem,pinpoint' its location, the youth re- according to several experts. ,sponded: "'I'd say it was right up there, 'The marked resemblance betweendirectly over the wires, not more than many of the Exeter sightings and re-fifty or sixty feet." ported observations of ball, . lightningA sighting was made three days later appears significant, as' well as their

in the same general area by Donald de frequent appearance on, along or near

Turka from Iris yard. His house. Fuller high-tension power lines under atmos-reports, was '''down the street from' a pheric : conditions likely to produce'section of high-voltage transmission corona discharges along the lines.line." The only, unresolved question is theThe Northeast power blackout pro- mechanism ' by 'which the corona dis-

50

.explode• • . t h e t h e o ry t h a t a c h a l l e n g i n gc a r e e r h a s to i n c lu d e c h a l l e n g in g

l i v in g c o n d it i o n s . U n it e dC o n tr o i .

t h e f a s t e s t g r o w in g a e r o s p a c e

e l e c t r o n i c s c o r p o r a t i o n i n t h e

P a c i f i c N o r t h w e s t . h a s c a r e e r

o p p o r t u n i t i e s o p e n n o w . M e n

w h o j o i n u s w i l l h a v e a c h a n c e

to c o n t r i b u t e t o a d v a n c e d p r o j - '

e c t s o f m a j o r i m p o r t a n c e t o t h e

a i r c r a f t a n d s p a c e i n d u s t r y . T h e y

will b e m e m be r s o f a y o u n g ,

v i g o ro u s o rg a n i z a t i o n t h a t i s el -

r e a d y l e a d i n g t h e w ay i n i t s f i e l d .

T h e y ' l l w o r k w it h som e of, t h e

b r i g h t e s t m i n d s i n t h e a e r o s p a c e

i n d u s t r y . R e a d t h e a d o n t h e

o p p o s i t e p a g e . T h i s i s t h e k i n d

o f a c t i o n y o u 'l l b e i n v o lv e d w it h .

a t U n i t e d C o n t r o l . Y e t , o u t s i d e

t h e p l a n t y o u ' l l ' e n j o y l i v i 'n g i n

o n e o f t h e w o r l d 's m o s t h e a u t i -

f u l r e g i o n s . D ri v e 2 0 m i n u t e s t o

t h e c o s m o p o l i t a n b u s t l e a n d CUl -

t u r a l a t t r a c t i o n s o f S e a t t l e . D r i v e -

4 0 m i n u t e s t o s n o w - c a p p e d

, p e a k s a n d m o u n t a i n w il d e r n e s s .G o l f y e a r 'r o u n d , c r u i s e o n h u n -

d r e d s o f m i l e s o f s h e l t e r e d w a t e r s ,

e n j o y c l e a n a i r . . . s p a c e . . . a h o m e

w i t h a v i e w . F o r f u l l d e t a i l s o n

c a r e e r s a t U n i t e d C o n t r o l , s e n d

y o u r r e s u m e t o M r . D . ,G . V aw te r .

E m p lo y m e n t M a n a g e r .

~ U N n E D C O l U m O l

U N lT ED C O N T RO t, C O R P . ! R E DM O N Il , W N . s tI 0 52

Aviat i~n Week & Space -Technology, August 22. 1966



O : _ ~. . ~ . . ~ _._ ~ _ _~ _ . .

UF04Bail Lightning Observations Compared

, CHARACTERISTICS EXETERUFOs BALL LIGHTNING

Usually reddish-orange and/ Multi·colored,

or blulsh-whlta, sometimes dominating

green. white.

Color with ted

or bluish·

Shape Round, oval or dome-shaped Spherical,· ellipsoidal or

doughnut·shaped.

Sometimes hangsmotion-

less or moves vertically

and horizontally at slow

or high speed.

Movement·· .. Often hovarinp or moving

up/down slowly. Also moves

horizontall~ at slow or high

speed.

..\ -

Dynamics Often seems to move with Appears to bounce or roll

rocking or undulating rno- in horizontal direction.

tion. Sometimes appears to Sometimes exhibits .spin.

be spinning. . ning motion.

No sound, or slight hum- Sometimes exhibits a slz-

ming or hissing. zling or hissing sound.

From several minutes to up From few seconds to

to half an hour. many minutes.

Difficult to estimate by most Daytime sightings (in

observersduring night sight· brighter ambient. light)

ings, but those given range usually are a few Inches

from basketball size to 200 in diameter but have

ft. in diameter. ranged up to 15 ft.

Sound

Lifetime

.Size

charge expands into a larger plasma seen in proximity to wires or str-ic-

with ball lightning characteristics. tures. It is usually airborrie or partiallyPresent limited knowledge of both. . airborne, moving randomly in space orphenomena complicates this problem. along electric conductors. It often ex-

But the similarity of electric corona dis- hibits rolling, tumbling or spinningcharge and natural lightning discharge : motions.which is known to induce ball lightning- Small-diameter bait Iightning has··would seem to su pport strongly the been reported. inside houses and othertheory presented here. . buildings. Recently an Air Force Stra-'

Despite long years of experience with tegic Air Command flight crew reported·corona, the experts disagree even over : seeing it· inside an aircraft during flight, ..the effect of temperature, barometric AVIATIONWEEK & SPACETECHNOLOGY·ressure and humidity in inducing was told by a scientist working in the '

corona. The reason is that power line field.corona is difficult to duplicate realisti- Many of theball lightning sightings .cally for study under controlled con-· reported by persons surveyed by Mc~'·dit ions , To do so would require con- Nally occurred on or near power lines.>-

struction of a huge facility, large enough Many different theories and mathe-,

to house a long transmission line within matical models have been advanced bya chamber so that barometric pressure scientists here and abroad to explain theand temperature could be varied while ', basic mechanism which generates balla variety of atmospheric contaminanta " lightning and the internal-externalere introduced. forces that enable it to survive for ex",

There is considerably less scientific tended periods.nformation available on ball lightning, Within recent months two Westing-lthough a number of conflicting thea- . house Electric research laboratory scien-ies have been advanced to explain it. tlsts, Dr. Martin A. Uman and Dr. C.everal years ago Dr. J. Rand McNally, W. Helstrom published a mathematicalr. of the Atomic Energy Commission's model that predicts many of the unusualak Ridge National Laboratories made properties of ball lightning. The Wes-lnforrnat survey of 1,962 persons in tinghouse research was partially funded

he laboratory. Surprisingly, he found by the Office of Naval Research.hat 110 of them, or 5.6% of the total This theory suggests that ball light-

ample, had observed ball lightning at . ning is a luminous, high-temperatureome time. Usually it Was associated region of air having high electricalith a conventional stroke of lightning; conductivity that has been heated tout not always. the required temperature by a stroke ofAnalyzing the returns, McNally con- lightning under suitable conditions.

that ball lightning can originate When cloud-to-ground lightning cur-andomly in space but is most often . rents are symmetrical through the ball,

Week& SpaceTechnology,August. 22. 1966

Easy readlno,

This is the

newKODAK LINAGRAPH '

Direct Print Paper,

Type 1843Expose it to Iight (fluorescent or day-

light) and almost instantly you get

a high-contrast blue trace that can

be easily read. But that isn't the only .'.( .

reason you'll like this paper. . . ..

The excellent image it produces

lasts for hours, even in bright day-

light. .. and for days, in room light. '

If you want the image to last foryears and years, process the paper In

the surprisingly inexpensive KODAK·

EKTAMATIC Processor, Model 218K.

Or in ordinary chemistry ..

Prefer an extra-thin base material?

Specify KODAK LINAGRAPH Direct

Print Paper, Type 1855 ..

Want more detailed information? Get It

fast from Instrumentation Products Sales .

EASTMAN KODAK (:OMPANY, .

Rocbestli!l",N. Y.14650.

F"i:

L " .,

5S



RESEARCH IN

TARGET CHARACTERISTICS

BENEFITS AICBM SYSTEMS

This special-purpose computer, designed by Cornell Aeronautical Labora-

tory under contract to BeH Telephone Laboratories, lnc., is capable of

processing resolvable targets detected by an AIC8M radar and desig-"

nating for further processing those which are likely to be lethal threats.In addition to its specific application to ballistic missile defense systems,

-, this Signal Data Processor represents a significant advance in'the extrac-

'. tion of discrimination data from raw radar signals.

CAL's continuing systems research program on radar discrimination has

defined potential targets - including their expected motions. An exten-

sive study of down-range experimental data is supported by theoretical

research in reentry physics.

In addition to AIC8M investigations, our systems research encompasses .

various programs for tactical and strategic weapon systems: penetration.

aids for tactical aircraft, new delivery techniques for chemical ordnance,

'. command and control .techniques for air and sea operations, ground'

mobility studies, ASW.investigations, and advanced research on recon- .

naissance and surveillance systems.

EXPERIENCED PERSONNEL ARE NEEDED FOR SUCH

RESEARCH IN BOTH BUFFALO AND WASHINGTON

.

. .:.-'.,'

.~ : " .

.- 'CORNELL AERONAUTICAL LABORATORY, INC.

OF CORNELL UNIVER$lrv.

I - - - - - - - - - - - ~ - - - - - - ~ - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ - II J.V.Rentschler " . . .Tie I

. J CORNELL 'AERONAUTICAL LABORATORY, INC. II Buffala, New Yark 14221 I

t 0 Please send me a copy of your factual. illustrated prospectus. "A Community of I1 setenee," and an 'application blank. .,

I0 I·m not Interested In investigating lob opportunities now, but • would like to see II your latut "Report on Research at CAL." II I: Name.._.•.~•..._.",:." _ ••._ _ _. _..__ -- - -- ..- ..-- - -"- -'~ ..-.- - "'•.v : I"

1 Street ..._...__.__.~.___.._._.__.__....._._ :_.__, _._ .._........._.•_.....:...:...._.__._.__....:.__--" I

I '. T.I City ,.;"._ ,_ .•_, _._ __._._ _ .._.", _. State._ .•_ _ _.._._ ...z ,p __ .._ __.·- I'

L ~_:.An:~a~o~~~n.::_r~~~! __ .:.. .. . ... .;. .__ ~~~.J

it ~angs stationary in air, but if thesecurrents become unsymmetr' ') the banwill move. I

The lightning ball will disappearquietly if the internal electric currentsgradually fade away, according to the

Westinghouse scientists' theory, but itcan also collapse with a bang if thecurrent drops sharply.One scientist who has worked in the

field for some time, Carsten M. Haaland,says that none of the proposed modelsfully explains the phenomenon. and thatit is possible to find flaws in all theoriesproposed so far. Haaland, currentlyemployed by AEC's Oak Ridge NationalLaboratory, previously conducted ex-periments in ball lightning when he wasa member of the Illinois Institute ofTechnology's Research Institute.

Using relatively crude discharges in

air produced by exploding wires,Haaland was able to create small ball

lightning for brief intervals (see p. 49).

Haaland believes that there are' atleast two different types of bat! light-ning, perhaps more, which 'would ex-plain why none of the theories advancedto date explains all sightings,Most theories on ball lightning hold

that some external source of energy isneeded to sustain the plasma for more -than a few seconds. Haaland pointed .out, in support of the proposed new

- theory, that the electromagnetic lines of -

force from high-tension lines extend fora considerable distance and could sup-

ply such energy. The Exeter lines areat a relatively low height (29 f1.) abovethe ground.Another scientist working in the field,

who declined to be quoted by name,was asked if he could positively excludethe possibility that power line coronacould generate ball lightning. He re-

Transmission GratingWashington-Tiny, low-cost transrnis-

siort"'9rating which can be used to

view UFOs to determine if they are

balls of ionized air. as a new theory

predicts, can be obtained from two

scientists employed by the Westing·

house Research Laboratories.

The transmission grating. roughly

the size of a .35·mm. color slide. is

small enough to fit into a man's

wallet. If the object when viewed

through the grating shows an intense

red line rather than a full color

spectrum, it Is a plasma.

Readers interested in obtaining a

grating and: instructions for Its use

should send $1, to cover fabricationand mailing cost, to Drs. J. L

Moruzz;/Martin Uman, 579 Lucia

Road, Pittsburgh, Pa. 15221. The

gratings are being made by the

scientists in a' home workshop. It is

not a Westinghouse sponsored effort.

.'-~~- "-~-'Avlatl~nWeek",!. Space Technology, A~gust 22, 1966



""j

P R E D IC T P O IN T - O f - f A I L U R E W IT H O U T D E S T R U C T IO N":i

~~

You can use Kaman Variable Impedance Dls- lion of turbine rpm. Vibration of the jet engine

placement Transducers for test stand maas- housing, extreme fluctual lons in temperature'

urements to determine point-of-fai lure without do not Inf luence accuracy of measurernams,

funning the test unit 10 destruction! For ex- Kamen Transducers measure displacement

ample, Kaman Non-Contacting Transducers between transducers and adjacent conductive

have been used in high speed jet engines to surface without mechanical connection tomeasure growth of turbine blades in lncre- the turbine blades. If you make measurements

menls as small as .OO0025"-equlvalent to 1 part In hosti le environments, send for technical

in t,OOotolai transducer range-to determine data and appl ication information on Kamanblade elongatfon and ether distortion as afunc- Nuclear 's Variable Impedance Transducer.

' .~

;KamanTransducers Excel in Hostile Environments

KamanNuclear1700 GARDEN OF THe GODS ROAD, COLORADO SPRINGS. COLORADO 81)907

Telephone: (303) 473-5880 • TWX: (510) 431-4929 .'

. P R OBLEMATIC A L RECREATION S 341

ii, .

"

t

',

"

: · ._ . , - .Ii 'i:

I '

Show, with a simple example, that an irrational·number raised to

an irrational power need not be irrational. =Contributed '

WESCON 1966 starts tomorrow and 8 is the number of the week!We'll explain. This year's show is "S-great-shows-in-one"featuring .

8 special product areas from communication and detection to .

computers ·to air and space control systems. (There are 5 other

areas to see.) And we're happy to announce that our eighth puzzle

booklet, Problematical Recreations'', is available to all problem'

. solvers during WESCON. Pick up your free. copy at the Litton

. booth #1507. We'll be on the main floor of the Los Angeles Sports-

Arena displaying our latest advances and new products.· Hope to

,see you the 23rd through the 26th!

ANSWE.RTO LAST WEEK's PROBLEM: 'Let BC be the side opposite

the 20° angle and D the point 10" from A on side AB. Construct

triangle ADE congruent to ABC withEDllBC. Join EC. Then

triangle AEC is equilateral and angle DEC=40°. Triangle EDeis isosceles and angle EDC is 70°. Thus the stripe makes an angle

of rso- (or its supplement) with the edge.

[8LITTON INDUSTRIES

B e v e r l y H i l l s , C a li f o r n ia

. ~-.-;

~ht1986' .

60

plied: "I wouldn't reject this possibility.because a conventional smoke-r'<g is aninteresting example of a p i; 1 heldtogether under the proper conditions by

a combination of internal and externalforces which are difficult to explain

scientifically."This seems an appropriate analogy

because not every instance of coronaalong power lines generates ball light-ning. The presence of salt vapor nearExeter would increase the conductivityof the air, and vaporization of the saltcrystals deposited 'during the dry sum-mer could provide a mechanism forincreasing current flow and air tempera-ture once corona occurred. Other con-taminants in the air at Exeter and atother locations could provide similarcatalytic action.

A spokesman for the National In-

vestigations Committee on Aerial Phe-nomena (NICAP), quoted by Fuller.says that UFO "sightings seem to con-centrate in small geographic areas dur-ing any wave. But the concentrationarea will shift around." This indicatesthat when the required combination ofatmospheric conditions exists, the phe-nomenon occurs repeatedly.It seems more than coincidence that

-only one of the dozens of Ex'eter UFOsightings reported by Fuller occurredin broad daylight. This prompted onepolice officer who was interviewed byFuller to ask: "Where does it go in the

daytime?"It is possible that the necessary at-

mospheric conditions, including air con-,tarninants, do not occur until the coolernight air arrives. Another possible ex-planation is that the luminous plasmaof ionized air usually is too faint to beeasily visible in daylight, although itcould appear quite bright in the dark.In the photograph taken by Lucci

near Pittsburgh, using a e-sec. exposure.the UFO appears to have about thesame brightness as the full moon along-.side it. i

Westinghouse's Dr. Martin Uman

suggests several possible tests which canbe made in the presence of a UFO sight-ing to confirm or deny the ball light-ning theory. If it is an electrical dis-charge, it should generate radio noise.At least several persons interviewed byFuller reported that their automobile

. radios had briefly become inoperative'when the object came near.If the object is viewed through an

inexpensive prism or transmission grat-ing it should be possible to ascertainwhether the. object is a solid spacecraft.or a form O f ball lightning, Dr. Uman .points out. If the object is a solid, the

viewer will see a continuous spectrum.but if it is a form of ball lightning hewill see instead a number of individualcolor lines, including intense red- radia-tion- due to the presence of hydrogenand blue due to nitrogen in the air; ..

Aviation Week & Space :te~hnOlogy, August 2~, 1966



/ "~~t;. :_ <. .M ,4,~ '" P / 1 / - J ' - f l c t /1 ;. (~i . . : b L ~f/U(1[(,t#?) i J J . . . ~ A;GA- Uf(f(,OY)

IJ("t.~tk __~ ;,J- l o U * - ~ ~ ~" ,- '~~1 ! : ! ' 4 .r A , «,Lu-~~ 4 ~&,C; :~

,", '1< k"~ ~~ -,~ ,tr-J " " , ; , _ w .- , t ' , _ Uf=-(), .: ~ tA ~.£ M~

! A A - A .u : (a.C"t~ A : : L J - { . J - C ! . c C o 'J'-ift,- 4U10 ~(A/~A~

~ V - )_1J~ '~"ct ~ l,-..t~ ~ f~

'Mp-- ~f V- ~ 1u ~ ~I- A -

~~ ,uvo l'~; J L <W L,;;.id t./~

vlA./ (J~/j,)-t.. ••f ~ c.~ o-l~: ' cJ!.../h

~ ~J_j lJ~ .i, ~0 _).,i + - - . I ~ -~.He ~- 1 A- /17 (lJ IQ,

, 1 J : ; t l_ ~ ~ '' ; ' I~ -::~, J

~ H-'~ ~ A;;j, ~ ~/

fi ~- "A' ';;' vi jJ, ~ A ~ J;6

~tr 1 1 ' ~ ~ Un; 1'~ « ~ tIM o.-t~ /('

c . : . J .4J lu~.f.2 ...+ ~'CP'~ Mulv{' ~ . tu o j ~

A U~()S) ( c o / ~avv ~~ ~~

f ! ,~~, cse ~ ~ 'lllj.J I' ~ :A;;

~ r ~i "tVt . . r» LJ:;( A: r,t.U ~



DRAFT

I am writing to thallk>you !or_;r®~ report' o~-;_an-:-

unidentified flying obj ec t seen on

We are grateful to you for advising the Department of this

inc ident and your report will be examined inthe Ministr, y of

Defence to see if there are any de fe nc e i mpl ic at io ns. We cannot

undertake to pursue our researc h, other than for defenc e implications,

to a point where positive c orrelation with a known obj ect is

established, nor to advise you of the probable identity of the



DRAFT

I am writing to thank you for your letter asking for

information about unidentified £lying objects.

The M inistr,y of D efence investigates UFO reports, whic h are

received from various sources, eg members of the public , the

police, S ervice units, etc , to see if there are any defence

implications. R eports are examined in the Ministry of D efence by

experienced staff. They do this with open minds. T hey have access

to all information available to the Ministry of D efence. They

call on the full sc ientific and professional resources of the

Ministry of Defence and may, if necessary, call inexpert advice

from other G overnment and non-G overnment bodies.

Since the M inistry of D efenc e interest inunidentified flying

objects is limited to the defence aspect investigations into the

scientific significance of the phenomena are not carried out.

You will no doubt wish to know, however, that~~gat±ons..-

over~a""'ll1l:Blb&r,~o!'·"~yeaps,.,...hav::&:~o·_£azL.produced""""'!:no-··-vi-dence:;::that.:.4JFOs.".

r: repre's'en~air~'8iTuefeltC'ei-;:y;nreat:,.:;..t~<the'~m:t:ed",,'Kingdom.,···,'"",Reported--..;t~ "e'\"p~ "'€~,t"t OtJ"f:r q " l1 , il " " '- ~ . . . . ~ J : . ~J'eQr~ ""

fsightings are considered to ~ originaty, ""'inthe main, from

aircraft or the lights of aircraft being seen under unusual

conditions, balloons and various meteorological phenomena as well

as astronomical sightings, space satellites and space Itjunk" •





. . .

c-; ~~.JU Q S Jh~ ~-

-4~~ O-~~- ~t'9'V

~~--4iJ (;~ t._Ar ~ ~~ < : t -

A4-- uFo ~h ~~cj.P ~ ~

A r+"::' , ~~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r . e .

of'k ?'D~'

2 > , ~ w_ lw e ~i) ~ A ~

C J ~ ~ Jc t h o J s M r i . ~ ( - C\.

~&- ~ "'- ry'd ~~ 7'~ol. ;_0 / 'tL o:t;_,_~ . t . .N d . _ d - v ; ; ~ <~ r-~~Aa0-f~ W~.-h

. ~ ~:J; ~. ~ ~ ~

,~ ._: (7/0 J..._ _ ~ f v r _ . J f~ ~

U I~O ~ t : ( ~ ' , . _ , ~ ~ ( ~

~ UJ'H ~~~-...: ~ I ' S 6 9

f4~~ 9~ f~ fJL r ! > u v 1{~ ~ < :_ ~ us ~_ ~_ - < . . j . ~ /

• e- t I

~Lv~·



• VfWi.,~ l , / " , . c ; l' u r O s Y t4-A r ~ u - e .c,C l A - - r r t 1 . r . ~---rM~ d~; : u . ~ cj ~~~

c,-) O-~ k oro ~. ~- Iv~ 'V"~

t - V (170 ~- J~ t1-) tf~" t-" ~

~ ~.~ P-P-1~~~- ~

~wI;; N<J-J v? ~ (~ *:;tL.A-

.a:» ' 1 u r A : ~:XJ_ ) ~ I ' H _

'7("J.

W~A~ C0 ~ i C A· ~1AJ~

~(-, /:h ~~ ~ 1-

r~o~ ~~). J ~~ fl.J~

uf ~ to ' t>~ A tMI ~

- '

~ A ir-{dY p~~. ~.J..;z;;.. e.J_.,

~'-'L evMlle~ ~ ~; I/I/~.:J:; I .;vi, sse; ~

~ ;~ 4; _lZA- ~ I f i -o ~I:; r... ~;4~~ ~~

w ~~r c~,I

< : ~ 1": ! ' " Y ~ F-~ 1-daf~ l ir tM - L { , - o v L 0 _JJ~~ ~ " '- oHJ'

- : A - ~ . ~ JLM - . J

~ ~~ <J'1~~ w,J_)

~ {w tJ..~ .-A cfl. .V ufo f-e._.... . . . .~

"- ~ f~~ ~.41



!y J l F- o.f(}~ 0-- _xL- ~~

_A)~'~~{- t.J&-g ~ .: c_ ~~

~~ r.~~A-e

~ G . _ W 7~ A jt{/~<, r.: g

iiflJ J ~ I J Y < ) ) ~ IiI.~;' M1~- , ,-' c_

~~c J ~ ~ tP ~ a . . . . uf1Jt u-

~~ t.-\,h< ] J JJ4 ~ Jj:;f_..I

:~,- o:-; ~C-_ ( < r r ~

,AN i~ 1; CL P~ I~'~

~ . ~ ~ ~ d 1 . _ _ -* ~I.--{;;A_;.

k, ~;!-! ~ £;. ~/- P- ~

~ j j ~crf _~ ~ L~-~. . ..

..A J~ ~ Lve A~~ 4

.~ f« ~r [) ~ ~-

~~ L4L-u "'-vI" ~ i+

.d..A- - . /< - ~ ~ ~ ~ .

5- ~~/~~ U~~

W4J?~ ~ J.La.?~~" r e - V ~

~/



t-~ ~-rh tJ- j w-f~ ~ ~ vV-; "

~ ~ ti~,:t ~v~ -«

~ ~ A - cL .p", . : t ~ ~M~ ~ i~~~'1crk.

t. d d Y ra..~~ ~t'~/ P ~ u- ~ ~

~~ .A ffi Y1f~- _A ~

' 1 0 0 :s- ()N' 1fo c f e . ~ ~cLy ~~

Ie, 70 ~~ ~ ~~ ~ S~

lL-t() } //'P~ " " u, c :Or t.J C/-, 6 Iu t~

/ I s - . . ~w-ru ~C~ f r t l k - ~ ~

~~U- ~ /r: c- ~

Cf..A1-~ ~r ? t - ~ c . J ~V~.

~-L& ~- ~ / t v 1 A : : ( 4_~-ytf ~ dl-v rrtiv tH~ 6 J rv ~ tv r r - L .

(J;h ~ ~ !v ~~,

~ ~ 4, ~ -v+" ei: Uro u~

~ c; ;t_.,-J fJ.e_ rf~ ~

f~ . < 9 ~~c#, k 1';;1

ur1 f c r ~ C o ~ . : ('~}..el



tv, c. ~_ ' # ~ I,fi... ~

~ ~(- i ! e - f -r¢ 4-~.J

_7~ ~/ ~ w.J-J _k

~ ~ M O Y . A - J?u ;;J Ak

o,~ d~o-t ~~ { 4.J-

~~~~~~~~

rd/~~ < ?~~ _ ~ _

~

> tu: ~- ~ toe: ~d A

.~~ l' [0-; { I~ !~ i

' ; _ _ - . 6 ; f~ ~ 9~ r. tff{)1AI ~ I - - - " - < - - r ffM , a-: e f . d~r"'.4._

3 ~ ~ (wAh Y1t'..~ C'lv

UFO l W V L o y~ ~ ~Ji_ -~ 7·~

0 / !M~ -~ :I~~~'t 'h(u-J.. (~/lfF fl{lt~ h~

wJ._ A f y u ~iJ a A~ rJ~~~~ i; ufo =:» Ji..-t-

ce

.rL ..U ~A- ~ (- t o

c.Ji(~ i e } , ; - t ; - / ( . f->-c, {U-~-. . . .



~J ./}~~(/ f,'f~{ ~

o/~~~ euJ_) A ~~

~ U. oe.« ~{ ~A- c 4 j - e - c v f . J : i - e

~~:.o L ~ ~- c y f?- ~t: rv ~Q..

;iL ~ ~ -::r~· ~~.

d. t J e _ U( ~ J~ ~ C J r y h f - e ~ cJ1

1 9 y { ; ~ ~eJ (/ ~ J q do ~e n P'iJn ~ .~

~_,t(; ~r~~~CI u u - - - . l. J

~ "r'": ~.Ak ~~

1o n - 0 t:V-", J'~, 1~

~4_~~A ~

~ ( W a ?J~'_ (J/~ tV (f--?

~ ~ t v Y e x ;o~: ~~~CL~I.

N t ~~~'1~'~-cAl v J i H - . { - ~ ~ . ; ~.-e ( < . ) - e

L.~,~~ »=:":.cu: v L r d ~1~

f ! -w c : s - ; ~ ~ ~ / 1.M

~ tk_

=>A A Uh~4~

" : " : " : 1 t 0 , - ole 9~ ~ ~

~Y~f ,-f-fl-J A r~I /



- ~

u . L f t ~ .a:» / , . _ ' - ' 1 . ~"f. ~

-t .+>t~ V" ~

/'hr(;{_.~ ",' ~r"_ c& ...-C J ~ z : : t e. .

t v t ~ j ) ~ ~ U F O ( " c; ~tI

~~( ..; oe J, J< .ff ~~

fl cA. jr.:1 fJ - a~. ~ - f A " r " U - - - t i .

~'f.ch ~. A- ~ ~~ &, ~

J t v 7 tb oJ/

1 · Iv~ J ~. I~~ ~~ 'l~ <, r c t ; ~

JU- c : ~~ '/ cnJ~~

I t : ; b 3 . ~ J < . . f&~ fu/ J P - J - ~ - - 4 J - e

~ ,~/~ ~cl ~ i _ _ S'~

~, :~ rx ~ ~ A- I ' k ' ( } ' t:Ly~ • C d - ~ 0;);:( C - . 04-d k f : i . . .

()~~ ~ L(fI ,_k ~ Iv. ~-

~ ~~~~..Q ._vA~

~- C- ": ..~ (_-

r:0- ~ 9 4;J

~Lr ~ 1 < . . h~ ~

~. 1M-/rr-~ /2_ ~L t- ~





-b ~. iaJ,_j;_£;_~ i.. r < ~ .$ ~~ ~ ~ C<.+0 /-J ~

d ~@ .-,. ~ ~ "":C{ OlAf

r=:«riGft· 7 < 1 Aj.. ~ .,",~ ~

~- ~ d'~'<) ~ ~ A ~

~ 1; A,0 - - - & _e.41.dU~J.e ~~ Cf

cA~ I-- ~ ~"UJ~

=rt:~u~

.1 " c. ~ .. co-h( ~ ~;t4 (/~ A

w~ ~ A f _ , _ ~ 1~ ~_

ft t - > c r t - f _ lJ•.J_/ f i~, ~

. A -U, ~ !~ ¥~ ~ it/{-

(V j ~_;A- ~ .k ~ J

~4~-~~q~vi.~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~VJ<,C- .

'. '

J~I '1 " " " ~ f t J 2 J:LJ- );L

""'-1iV1l'-' ""'...............-'--" -. r dV M_., Y4y c . _ 0 _ b { J£.

1£1,.w-'{- o J - R . ~f+~~- ~ ~ ~

C - ~~ vi.h& . . - ,: tI

9 · r '" r..J.j /..,,;;.( .A ~ en...} .ea; fa~.

~~.











































































































































































































































































































































































































