|
THE CUFONSM
1952 CIA UFO-RELATED DOCUMENT SAMPLER
|
| Corrections provided by researcher Brad
Sparks added 23-Mar-2004 by J. Klotz
Comment by CUFONSM SYSOP, 17-MAY-1996 A SAMPLER OF UFO-RELATED DOCUMENTS When we read of the "nearly 900 pages of UFO-related documents" [1] which the Central Intelligence Agency had previously released, [2] we filed a request for the documents, and any additional UFO-related material which had been declassified in the interim. The CIA replied that for less than $100 in reproduction fees, they would ship the package to us. We remitted the required amount, and presently (in the range of a few months) the United States Postal Service (USPS) delivered the package, wrapped in brown paper, the length and width of legal size paper (8.5 in. X 14 in.), and nearly four inches thick. Of course, we were excited. We opened the package, and found that some additional records had been included. These consisted entirely of copies of Russian language magazine and newspaper articles. No translations, just 'open source' articles, which had previously been classified SECRET, and poor photocopies of them to boot. This brought the released page count to slightly over 1000. As we began to look over the documents, we discovered that there quite a few duplications and many partially or completely unreadable pages. However, a great deal of information, which is legible and intact, remains in hundreds of documents. From internal references to related documents, organizations, programs, projects, etc., not among the released material, we reasonably conclude that the released documents represent a small portion of the total number of UFO-related documents being held by the Central Intelligence Agency. We also believe that similar situations exist in many other intelligence, military and scientific agencies. As usual with this series of CUFON Samplers, the contents are completely at the whim of the CUFON SYSOP. In this case, all documents shipped to us by the CIA dated during 1952, and those documents without dates which, from content, we believe to be from 1952, are included. Russian language open source material declassified and released is not included. BACKGROUND The year 1952 was chosen because it is, it seems to us, one of two main early "watershed" years of the modern UFO era, the other being 1947. The huge 1952 flap, and particularly the "Washington National Sightings" [3] in July 1952, mark this year as notable in UFO history. The Washington National Sightings featured multiple simultaneous radar and coincident ground and airborne visual sightings of UFOs over the White House and the Washington DC restricted airspace. Although these sightings, during which interceptors were scrambled, were "explained" as "temperature inversions," the weather data is available [4], and some have asserted that the temperature differences were too small to have produced all the documented phenomena. Also, as we've said before, we believe that today's UFO attitudes and the actions of the United States government regarding UFO are rooted in the 1947 - 1953 time frame. Indeed, we believe that many (UFO related) actions on the part of the US government resulted directly from the 1952 Washington sightings. A valid question would be: 'If the Washington sightings were so impressive and motivating, where are all the CIA documents relating to them?' Surely, if the Washington Sightings motivated the Robertson Panel of 1953, where among these released CIA documents are all the pages which an event of such magnitude would certainly generate?' While only one document contained herein refers directly to the Washington sightings, the question remains valid. Because of this and the many other references to documents which are not in the CIA packet, we do not accept that the nearly 1000 pages the CIA has released is the total of the UFO-related CIA documents which exist or existed. --------
CONTENTS These files make up the CUFONSM 1952 CIA UFO Sampler:
ORDER OF DOCUMENT PRESENTATION Within the files CIA-52-1.HTM and CIA-52-2.HTM, documents are presented chronologically except for the few documents which do not bear a date, but from content, most probably come from 1952. These are in a section at the end of the file, and are presented in the "package" order as received from the CIA. TEXT DISPLAY STANDARDS As always, We have tried to maintain pagination. Some symbols and such are used to indicate certain aspects of the original papers, but although we tried, we can't guarantee that these were 100% uniformly or consistently applied: 1. ======= Double lines of equal signs
denotes a break between documents 2. ======= Single lines of equal signs denotes a break between pages of a document. 3. ??? ? ? ?'s denote unreadable characters. 4. /s/ Indicates an actual (or rubber stamped) signature in the original. 5. { 8 Nov } Text in curly brackets is handwritten on the original. ================================================================ SYMBOLS These are the "symbols" or "acronyms" which are used in the documents in the CUFON 1952 CIA UFO DOCUMENT SAMPLER files. We couldn't find the meaning of a few; these are marked with ?.
================================================================ Jim
Klotz,
Dale Goudie ================================================================ DOCUMENTS ================================================================ [
] SECURITY INFORMATION MEMORANDUM FOR: Deputy Director/Intelligence SUBJECT: Recent Sightings of Unexplained Objects In the past several weeks a number of radar and visual sightings of unidentified aerial objects have been reported. Although this office has maintained a continuing review of such reported sightings during the past three years, a special study group has been formed to review this subject to date. D/CI will participate in the study with D/SI and a report should be ready about 15 August.
RALPH L. CLARK OSI:FCD:RLC mtw (28July52) Opns/SI - 3 [ ] [ ] ================================================================ [ ] JUL 29 1952 [ ] DD/SI AD/SI DAD/SI P. G. STRONG F. C. DURANT H. CHANNING M. J. CARDER J. B. QUIGLEY [ ] [ ] ================================================================ [ ] INFORMAL Deputy Assistant Director/SI 1 August 1952 Acting Chief, Weapons & Equipment Division "Flying Saucers" 1. Pursuant to your request for overall evaluation of "flying saucers" and associated reports, the following is pertinent:
2. Notwithstanding the foregoing tentative facts, so long as a series of reports remains "unexplainable" (interplanetary aspects and alien origin not being thoroughly excluded from consideration) caution requires that intelligence continue coverage of the subject. 3. It is recommended that CIA surveillance of subject matter, in coordination with proper authorities of primary operational concern at ATIC, be continued. It is strongly urged, however, that no indication of CIA interest or concern reach the press or public, in view of their probable alarmist tendencies to accept such interest as "confirmatory" of the soundness of "unpublished facts" in the hands of the U. S. 4. The undersigned has arranged with the Commanding Officer of the Air Technical Intelligence Center at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio, for a thorough and comprehensive briefing related to this subject on 8 August 1952. Subsequent to obtaining full detains, a detailed analysis will be prepared and forwarded. EDWARD TAUSS [ ] ================================================================ {8 Aug} AFP Paris. Radio teletype in French to the Americans on 8 August 1952, carried the following item: [ ] Bonn. Writing in the German magazine "Der Flieger', Dr. Waldemar Beck says that a flying saucer which recently fell at Sptitzbergen has been studied by eminent Norwegian and German rocket experts. He writes that Dr. Norsel, a Norwegian expert in rocket construction went to the place where the flying saucer had fallen a few hours after it had been discovered in the mountains of Sptizbergen by a Norwegian jet plane. The investigation has also shown that the flying saucer crashed because of a defect in its radio piloting system. The saucer which carried no crew has a diameter of 47 meters. The steel used in its construction is an unknown alloy. It consists of an exterior disc provided at its peripheral with 46 jets. This disc pivots around the central sphere which contains the measurement and remote control equipment. The measurement instructions have an inscription in Russian. { 8 Aug. ------ } ================================================================ { release } Minutes The meeting was at 0835 in Mr. Steele's office with a quorum consisting of Mr. Sullivan, Chairman, Mr. Ahern, Mr. Barnard, Mr. Engle, Dr. Fairchild, Dr. Fondiller, {Mr.} Mr. Sullivan opened the meeting by saying that a project is to be started in the P&E
{has been}
{a} ATIC has the job of finding out about [these] "flying saucers" and keeping records. {OPR} Mr. Elby for Physics, and Mr. Barnard for Electronics and Communications. {Mr.}
{Mr. Sullivan}
{Mr. Gordon is to} Mr. Steele wanted to know if P&E should be in a position to answer requests coming to us. Since ATIC has a standard form for reference purposes, requests would be answered through contact with them. Air Force has local agents to look into any questions coming to them. ATIC has [a] record{s}, it was believed, to cover the whole world. It was stated that Mr. S. Possony, who may be a special officer in ================================================================ A-2, may be able to contribute something to this problem. Mr. Sullivan gave a summary of the
{in the ?Wash Navy Yard?}
{at this time, so} XXXXXXXXXXXXX Distribution: { * where so many "flying saucers" have been } ================================================================ [
] FLYING SAUCERS During the past weeks, with the phenomenal increase in the number of Flying Saucer reports there has been a tremendous stimulation of both public and official interest in the subject. Requests for information have poured into the Air Force, including an official inquiry from the White House. Finally on July 29, General Samford held a press conference in which he stated, that analysis showed "no pattern of anything remotely consistent with any menace to the United States;" that recent Washington sightings were possibly due to "temperature inversions," others to ionized clouds, ice formations, etc.; that instrumentation would be emphasized henceforth in the Air Force Study. He emphatically stated that the unexplained sightings could not have resulted from any experiments or tests conducted by the United States. At this point, OSI felt that it would be timely to make an evaluation of the Air Force Study, its methodology and coverage, the relation of its conclusions to various theories which have been propounded, and to try to reach some conclusion as to the intelligence implications of the [
] ================================================================ [
] problem - if any. In view of the wide interest within the Agency, this briefing has been arranged so that we could report on the survey. It must be mentioned tat the outside knowledge of Agency interest in Flying Saucers carries the risk of making the problem more serious in the public mind that it already is, which we and the Air Force agree must be avoided. In order to supply both breadth and depth to the survey we have reviewed our own intelligence, going back to the Swedish sightings of 1946; reviewed a large number of individual official reports, recent press and magazine coverage and the main popular books. Indexes of the Soviet press were scanned. We interviewed a representative of the Air Force Special Studies Group. Following this, we spent a day at Wright Field in a thorough discussion with the officers conducting the ATIC study, and finally we took the problem to a selected group of our own consultants, all leaders in their scientific fields. From all this, we have come up with facts, theories, explanations and some conclusions, which we will cover in a brief summary of Flying Saucers history, an analysis of the ATIC work, and a discussion of the [
] ================================================================ [
] explained sightings and of possible theories regarding the unexplained. We make no recommendations of action. We would ask that questions be held until the end. The saucer furore in this country started in June 1947 when Kenneth Arnold, a reputable business man flying his own plane reported nine discs flying in formation past Mount Rainier at an estimated speed of 1000 miles per hour. This was quickly followed in early July 1947 by reports from a doctor in Phoenix, Arizona, the pilot and co-pilot of a United Air Liner at Boise, Idaho, and field staff members at Muroc Test Base, California. The public was somewhat preconditioned by the earlier Swedish reports of unidentified rockets and the press had a field day. Among the continuing and increasing mass of reports over the months, three further incidents which received wide publicity might be mentioned as they did much not only to maintain interest but also supply bases for some of the more fantastic theories. In January 1948, an interception was attempted at Godman Field Kentucky and the pilot - Captain Mantell -crashed and was killed. In October 1948, a National Guard fighter pilot at Fargo, North Dakota - Lt. Gorman - coming after dark spotted a [
] ================================================================ [
] moving light below him - also seen from the field - and for twenty minutes put on a dog-fight with it, finally, being outdistanced at 17,000 feet. the third incident occurred in April 1949 at White Sands proving ground when a Navy Commander, tracking a missile flight by theodolite, watched two discs maneuvering at high speed around the test rocket. three such sightings were made at White Sands within a month. Meanwhile in 1948, Air Force initiated Project Saucer to study the phenomena, issued a preliminary report in April 1949 and in December 1949 released sections of its secret report to the press. The conclusion was that the sightings stemmed from three causes: 1. Mass hysteria 2. Hallucination and hoax 3. Misinterpretation of known objects This satisfied much of the public but not certain sensational writers. The resulting highly speculative books and magazine articles combined with continued reports of sightings built up such a resurgence of public interest that Air Force, early in 1951, reopened its study, instituted a world-wide reporting system, and alerted its bases to intercept the [
] ================================================================ [
] unidentified objects. Planes had orders not to shoot. Now, let's examine for a moment what all these people claim to have seen. Grouped broadly as visual, radar, and combined visual and radar, ATIC has two major visual classes - first, spherical or elliptical objects, usually of bright metallic lustre. some small (2 or 3 feet across) most estimated at 100 feet diameter and a few 1000 feet wide. There are variants in this group, such as torpedoes, triangulars, pencils, even mattress-shapes. These are all daylight reportings. The second visual group, all night reporting, consists of lights and various luminosities, such as green, flaming-red or blue-white fire balls, moving points of light, and luminous streamers. Both categories are reported as single objects, in non-symmetrical groups and in formations of varying numbers. reported characteristics include three general levels of speed: hovering; moderate, as with conventional aircraft; and stupendous, up to 10,000 miles per hour in the White Sands incident. Violent maneuvering was reported in somewhat less than 10%. Accelerations have been given as high as 20 G's. With few exceptions, there has been a [
] ================================================================ [
] complete absence of sound or vapor trail. Evasion upon approach is common. Radars have shown many unidentified "blips" but there is no reported instance of a track from station to station. The blip, in almost every case, passed through the center of the scope. In combined visual and radar sightings, I might mention as illustrations three specific reports. First, a visual sighting from a plane over Sandy Hook coincident with a blip seen on the ground radar at Fort Monmouth, new Jersey. Second, a recent Far East report from an aircraft carrier operating between southern Korea and Honshu. here ships radar reported a high speed target approaching from the north. Observers on the bridge picked it up visually as a plane. When still far out, it did a superspeed 180 deg. turn and shortly thereafter split in two, disappearing both visually and in PPI scopes. The third occurred a few days ago at Wright Field and has not yet been fully analyzed. Two F-94's with camera guns were vectored in on [
] ================================================================ [
] a blip. Both pilots sighted an object and one locked on with his AI equipment. Reaching his maximum allowable altitude, he triggered his camera and the negative shows "an object." Since 1947, there have been about 1500 official reports of sightings plus an enormous volume of letters, phone calls, and press reports. During this July alone, official reports totaled 250. Of the 1500, ATIC carries 20% as unexplained and of those received since the first of this year, 28%. [They feel that the latter figure might be reduced to 10% on the basis of more information or fuller investigation.] Now to shift away from the Air Force for a moment and into the public domain, there are four major theories in explanation of the Flying saucer. First, that it is a U.S. secret weapon development. This has been denied officially at the highest level of the government and to make doubly certain we queried Dr. Whitman, Chairman of the Research and Development Board. On a Top Secret basis, he, too, denies it. however, in the light of the Manhattan District early super security, two factors might be mentioned which tend to confirm the denials - first, the official action of alerting all Air Force commands to intercept, and second, the unbelievable risk aspect of such flights in established airlanes. [
] ================================================================ [
] The second theory is that these are a Russian development. Though we know that the Russians have done work on elliptical and delta wing principles, we have absolutely no intelligence of such a technological advance as would be indicated here in either design or energy source. Further, there seems to be no logical reason for the security risk which would be involved and there has been no indication of a reconnaissance pattern. However, it should be mentioned that there is a totally unsupported thesis that this may be a Russian high altitude development of the World War II Jap balloon effort using preset flares and the resulting US press reports to check flight tracks. The third theory is the man from Mars - space ships - interplanetary travelers. Even though we might admit that intelligent life may exist elsewhere and that space travel is possible, there is no shred of evidence to support this theory at present. There have been no astronomical observations in confirmation - no slightest indication of the orbiting which would probably be necessary - and no tracking. However, it might be noted that Comdr. Mc Laughlin (of the White Sands report), a number of General Mills balloon people [
] ================================================================ [
] and many others are reported to be convinced of this theory. The fourth major theory is that, now held by the Air Force, that the sightings, given adequate data, can be explained on the basis either of: Misinterpretation of known objects, or of as yet little understood natural phenomena. So much for the history of the problem. Mr. Eng will now pick up with an analysis of the Air Force Study. [
] ================================================================ [
] FLYING SAUCERS The purpose of this presentation is to report the findings of the OSI Study group as to the implications of the Flying Saucer problem. I will start with a resume of what we have done and a short history of the subject - Mr. Eng will out line the Air Force Effort - [ ] will go into the explanations of sightings - I will give you our conclusions. Our group reviewed available intelligence, official reports, press and magazine cover age and the main popular books. Indexes of the Soviet press were scanned. We spent a day at Wright Field with the officers conducting the Air Force study, and finally we took the problem to a group of our own consultants. The saucer furore in this country started in June 1947 with a report of nine discs flying in formation past Mount Rainier at an estimated speed of 1000 miles an hour. This was followed immediately by a continuing and increasing flood of reports over the months. Therefore, in 194?, Air Force initiated Project Saucer to study [ ] ================================================================ [
] the phenomena and in December 1949 released sections of its secret report to the press. The conclusion was that the sightings stemmed from three causes: 1. Mass hysteria 2. Hallucination and hoax 3. Misinterpretation of known objects This satisfied much of the public but not certain sensational writers. The resulting highly speculative books and magazine articles combined with increasing reports of sightings built up such a resurgence of public interest that Air Force, early in 1951, reopened its study, instituted a world-wide reporting system, and alerted its bases to intercept the unidentified objects. General Samford gave their interim conclusions in his recent press conference. these were that analysis of the cases showed "no pattern of anything consistent with any menace to the United States"; that the recent Washington reports were probably due to "temperature inversions"; and that the unexplained sightings could have resulted from any experiments or tests conducted by the United States. So much for the
history.
[ ] ================================================================ [ ] In summarizing this discussion, I would restate that on three of the main theories in explanation of these phenomena, - a US development, a Russian development, and space ships - the evidence either of fact or of logic is so strongly against them that they warrant at present no more than speculative consideration. However, it is important that there are many who believe in them and will continue to do so in spite of any official pronouncement which may be made. this whole affair has demonstrated that there is a fair proportion of our population which is mentally conditioned to acceptance of the incredible. Thus we arrive at two danger points which, in a situation of international tension, seem to have National Security implications. Earlier, we mentioned our search of the Soviet press. ATIC made a similar search. With world-wide sightings reported, we have found not one report or comment, even satirical, in the Russian press. This could only result from an official policy decision and of course raises the question of why and of whether or not these sightings could be used from a psychological warfare point of view either offensively or defensively. Air Force is aware of this and had investigated a number of the [
] ================================================================ [ ] civilian groups that have sprung up to follow the subject. One - the Civilian Saucer Committee in California has substantial funds, strongly influences the editorial policy of a number of newspapers and has leaders whose connections may be questionable. Air Force is watching this organization because of its power to touch off mass hysteria and panic. Perhaps we, from an intelligence point of view, should watch for any indication of Russian efforts to capitalize upon this present American credulity. Of even greater moment is the second danger. Our air warning system will undoubtedly always depend upon a combination of radar scanning and visual observation. We give Russia the capability of delivering an air attack against us, yet at any given moment now, there may be a dozen official unidentified sightings plus many unofficial. At the moment of attack, how will we, on an instant basis, distinguish hardware from phantom? The answer, of course, [ ] is that until far greater [
] ================================================================ [ ] knowledge is achieved of the causes of the sightings - the little understood phenomena Mr. ?ellmer has described - we will run the increasing risk of false alerts and the even greater danger of tabbing the real as false. this is primarily an operational research problem but as long as it exists it will have intelligence implications because of its bearing on air vulnerability. One purpose in this survey has been to examine what is being done and make some assessment of its validity. The Air Force study is valid. On a case by case basis, the great bulk of the sightings have been and will continue to be explained - but the limited case approach will never solve this second real problem - positive identification. As to what should be done, we propose to discuss the research problem with the Research and Development Board and to pass on to the Air Force an offer from M.I.T. to assist in a study of some of the fundamentals. We suggest that the psychological possibilities both for and against us should be investigated. From an intelligence point of view {?} OGI has been and will continue watching Russian research and development in the scientific fields involved. [
] ================================================================ [
] DRAFT 15 August 1952 In the next few minutes, I intend to touch briefly upon the official explanations of the great majority of sightings of unidentified flying objects (or UFOs') and mention possible phenomena which may account for some of the open case. Before we elaborate upon the current explanations I would like you to keep in mind certain facts which are generally common to all reports. First, is the earnestness of those making reports. These people are certain that they have seen something. Secondly, objects sighted almost always are reported to be against the sky thereby providing no point of reference. Thirdly, without a reference point, a valid estimation of size, speed, distance of relative motion is virtually impossible. Finally, no debris or material evidence has ever been recovered following an unexplained sighting. In each case of reported sightings exist the personal element. This is the combined effect of psychological and physiological factors which [
] ================================================================ [
] individually or together may have outstanding importance in the accuracy of a person's report. These factors generally cannot be determined adequately. The psychological factors are: Mental conditioning by newspaper stories of earlier reported sightings Individual emotional response with respect to the unknown. Desire for publicity resulting in "embroidering" of facts or complete fabrication. Emotion of chase of interceptor pilots. The major physiological factors are: General physical condition of the person at the time of sighting: Conditions of fatigue, anoxia. Existence and extent of eye strain immediately preceding sighting. Insufficient night adaption. Now let us take up the explanations which have been used to account for well over a thousand cases. Under the category of: "Misinterpretation of identifiable objects," ATIC feels that the most prevalent misinterpretations have been: free balloons, aircraft, astronomical bodies, atmospheric - 2 - ================================================================ [
] phenomena, instrument errors and windblown objects. There are two types of high altitude balloons, radiosonde and the Navy Skyhook. They may reach altitudes as high as 20 miles. Although both types are tracked and plotted for some distance, there generally is no accurate confirmation of destruction. Consequently, because of the large number released daily by the weather services and research groups in the U.S., it is possible that they might appear over almost any geographic location. The longevity of the gas bags is not known but is believed to be possibly weeks. Night-launched balloons carry a bright light to facilitate tracking. Many others have radar-reflecting panels.
{release} - 3 - ================================================================ [
] A case under known conditions occurred some months ago at Wright Field which illustrates the fact that objects at high altitudes may be in sharp illumination even one or two hours before dawn or after. This case also points up interesting psychological factors. The time was near dusk. Captain Ruppelt was called out to witness a sighting of three red lights in the sky. Even through binoculars he could not determine their nature. An F-94 interceptor climbed to 43,000 feet. At this altitude the pilot could see clearly that the objects were a cluster of three Skyhook balloons still well above him, sailing an even course across the sky. By this time, telephone reports had started to come in. The objects were described as violently maneuvering "saucers" of various shapes and colors. Even "looping" maneuvers were reported. The medical staff at Wright Field, including the senior psychologist, witnessed the sighting. The next day this staff turned in a report stating that, despite the official statement that these objects were balloons, they felt that this was in error and that the sighting must have been of some other unknown origin. Probably the second ,most common misinterpretation is that of conventional aircraft. [
] ================================================================ [
] In the daytime, aircraft, particularly those that are unpainted, can give extremely brilliant reflections of sunlight. An interesting case under known conditions is one which occurred last year in Maryland. A group of aircraft design engineers went into the country to witness tests of their own jet airplane. The three test aircraft, with unpainted wings and red fuselages, passed directly overhead. All engineers agreed that if they had not known what the objects were, and since they could not observe the silver wings against the sky, they would have reported the red fuselages as flaming trails and they would have imagined objects emitting them. At nighttime the possibility for misinterpretation of aircraft increases. First there are the dusk and dawn illuminations already mentioned. Similarly, misinterpretations have been made of running lights or reflections of aircraft in clouds. There are a number of reports of cylindrical objects with square tails or having lighted portholes which have been explained as distorted images of conventional aircraft profiles on clouds of ice crystals. Some time ago a pulsating bright yellow light was reported moving through the sky near Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. For months this report was relegated to the "unexplained" file. A few weeks ago in Washington a man [
] ================================================================ [
] who was familiar with this report saw an anti-collision light installation on a Capital Airlines airplane. This new safety device, a light mounted on the nose of the airplane, oscillates back and forth laterally similar to those installed on some ambulances and police cars. A check with Capital Airlines revealed that an airplane fitted with such a light had "checked in" while flying near Pittsburgh at the exact time and place of the reporting sighting. Let us turn now to astronomical phenomena. In the daytime some planets, particularly Venus, can be seen clearly as a bright white object even at high noon under certain conditions. At night, meteors of various varieties have been mistaken for maneuvering lights. The luminous meteor trail of ionized gas has been picked up by radar and at times misunderstood. This ionized trail may remain visible to the eye for as long as one hour. Natural phenomena in the Earth's atmosphere have caused may misinterpretations. High altitude "jet streams" traveling at high velocities, temperature inversions and conditions of turbulent mixing of air of greatly different temperatures and densities exist and are not charted. They account for optical as well as radar aberrations in a number of cases. In one case - 6 -
[ ] ================================================================ [
] of a ground radar sighting in Maryland the pilot of an interceptor aircraft, with his AI gear "locked on" a "blip", found himself on a steeply sloping downwards course at low altitude. This occurred three times indicating that the target was on the ground and that the course of the radar beam had been distorted. It should be noted that radar anomalies both internal and external in nature still exist in disturbing numbers. The ability of a radar observer to accurately determine the validity of "blips" on his scope is directly proportional to the length and breadth of his experience. Cloud effects have affected the accuracy of a number of sightings. Rapidly scudding clouds lend an apparent motion to a fixed body. The moon or a bright planet shining through a cloud hole at times does appear as a "flaming object." Other "explainable" misinterpretations which are known to have accounted for reports of sightings include a wide variety of objects. Windblown objects is one. Such an incident was reported by the U.S. Consul at Merida, Yucatan, Mexico. here is his actual report: "At about 2:00
p.m. last Sunday, I observed a silvery, shining, disc-like object
floating in the - 7 - ================================================================ [
]
Another misinterpretation is that of searchlights on clouds which has been the cause of several reports of sightings as in the recent case described by the Secretary of Defense. Finally, there is a case which occurred at Frenchman's Flat, Nevada. "Blips" in formation were picked up on the radar scope. They were - 8 - ================================================================ [
] reported to be traveling at terrific speed at 30,000 feet. It happened that the reporting station had a searchlight and it was turned on in the direction of the radar sighting. It was immediately discovered that the objects were Canadian Geese flying at 300 feet altitude. The above explanations are believed by ATIC to account for 80% of the sightings reported. They feel that the remaining 20% might be reducible to 10% were it not for these reasons: Insufficient information reported Incorrect information unwittingly or purposely reported Insufficient or total lack of subsequent investigation of details. This still leaves ATIC with a possible 10%
of sightings for which there is no available Considering that the remaining cases might have been caused by little understood natural phenomena, the OSI Panel conferred at length with three of our consultants in Boston. These men are outstanding in the fields of geophysics, electronics and chemistry. They emphasized to us that there - 9 - [
] ================================================================ [
] are many scientific frontiers which have as yet been little explored or charted. In these areas occur phenomena which may account for optical or electronic aberrations as well as for things actually seen. They listed three categories: atmospherics, ionization, and extra-terrestrial phenomena. They suggested also that products of nuclear fission might have some effect upon these. In the field of atmospherics would be the temperature inversions stressed by General Samford. This phenomenon exists but the exact mechanics of its cause, its nature and manner of dissipation are not well understood. Neither is its effect upon electromagnetic and light beams causing their refraction or reflection. little is known of clouds of ice crystals which exist at altitudes to 60,000 feet. Studies of the winds and the physical and chemical properties of air at very high altitudes have only recently commenced with the availability of such agents at high altitude balloons and research rockets. The second category was ionization. The Heaviside (or "E") layer of ionization, the "F" layer above it, and their relation to radio transmission - 10 - [
] ================================================================ [
] were thought ten years ago to be fairly well understood. Within the past year, however, the whole concept of the "F" layer has been changed. It has been discovered that it splits sometimes into two layers of ionization known as F-1 and F-2. Recent tests utilizing these layers have shown it possible to transmit as far as 1,000 miles using certain VHF frequencies. This is totally opposed to the previous well accepted opinion that maximum VHF transmission distances was limited to "line of sight." Clouds of ice crystals become luminous under certain conditions of ionization. The factors affecting the way in which the electrostatic charge on the earth is continuously rejuvenated by thunderstorm lightning are obscure. Ball lightning, a luminous phenomenon which has been reported for centuries, appears in various colors but its nature is not known. St. Elmo's fire, corona discharge and Aurora Borealis are catalogued in a variety of forms but their exact nature is unknown. The movement of vortices of smoke particles, clouds of moisture and ice crystals will cause changes in electrostatic potential and may be affected by the earth's magnetic field. - 11 - ================================================================ - 12 - ================================================================ [
] material tossed aloft could appreciably affect atmospheric phenomena. For instance, the cosmic and gamma natural radiation which pours in daily from outer space is many times greater than the radiation produced by atomic bomb blasts. This list could be extended at length. Suffice to say, our ignorance of the nature and controlling factors of all of the above is immense. Effects of interaction between these natural phenomena and radioactive material in the air can only be conjectured. The appearance of unusual optical or radar sightings caused by these phenomena is possible. Their occurrences cannot be predicted. There is some strength to the hypothesis that many of the unexplained sightings of UFO's may be electromagnetic or electrostatic in character. Factors supporting this hypothesis are: Absence of sound, although apparently moving rapidly in the atmosphere. Phenomena are apparently affected by shock waves or electromagnetic radiation of aircraft. Reports of erratic operation of various kinds of instruments in [
] ================================================================ [
] the vicinity of sightings. Sightings of UFO's reported at Los Alamos and Oak Ridge, at a time when the background radiation count had risen inexplicably. Here we run out of even "blue yonder" explanations that might be tenable, and, we still are left with numbers of incredible reports from credible observers.
[
] ================================================================ ___________ MEMORANDUM FOR: Deputy Director (Intelligence) SUBJECT: USSR and Satellite Mention of Flying Saucers 1. A search of Foreign Documents Division files has so far produced no factual evidence that subject has been mentioned in the Soviet Satellite press within the last two years. It is believed that a derisive comment was made in a Russian newspaper in 1948 on this subject but so far the article has not been found. 2. FBID has one broadcast on this subject, dated 10 June 1951, which is quoted below:
3. A State Department cable recently received from Budapest quotes the August 14th copy of Szabad Nep as follows:
4. FBID has been requested to alert the field stations to any mention of Flying Saucers by iron Curtain Countries.
/s/ George G. Carey ================================================================ [
]
The Air Force Stand on "Flying Saucers" -- as stated by I. The Air Force has primary responsibility for investigating 'flying saucers". The unit concerned with these investigations is a part of the Air Technical Intelligence Center at Dayton, Ohio, and consists of three officers (a Captain in charge) and two civilians. They receive reports of sightings, analyze and attempt to explain them. A standard reporting form has been prepared which is used on a world-wide basis. The Air Force Office of Special Investigations checks into each sighting attempting to determine its authenticity and the reliability of the observer. II. (A) The Air Force denies that "flying saucers" are: (1) U.S. secret
weapons (B) It is believed that all sightings of "flying saucers" are: (1) Well known
objects such as balloons (over 4000 are released daily in the U.S.),
aircraft, (2) Phenomena of the
atmosphere which are at present poorly understood, e.g., refractions III. Not a shred of evidence exist to substantiate the belief that "flying saucers" are material objects not falling into category IIB(1) above. IV. A study of "flying saucer" sightings on a geographical basis showed them to be more frequent in the vicinity of atomic energy installations (which is explained by the greater security consciousness of persons in those areas). That by-products of atomic fission may in some way act catalytically to produce "flying saucers" has not been disproved. The greatest number of sightings has been made at or near Dayton, Ohio where the investigations are going on. V. Of the thousands of "flying saucers" sighted of which there are records, the Air Force says that 78% have been explained by either IIB(1) or IIB(2) above, 2% have been exposed as hoaxes and the remaining 20% have not been explained primarily because of the vague descriptions given by the observers. VI. The Air Force is mostly interested in the "saucer" problem because of its psychological warfare implications. In reviewing publications designed for Soviet consumption, there has not been a single reference to "flying saucers". On the other hand, several "saucer" societies in the United States have been investigated. Key members of some of these societies which have been instrumental in keeping the "flying saucer" craze before the public have been exposed as being of doubtful
{by} [ ] ================================================================ [ ] defense could not operate effectively if the Air Force were constantly called upon to intercept mirages which persons had mistaken for enemy aircraft. ARG [ ] ================================================================ [ ]
1. PROBLEM To determine: a. Whether there are national security
implications in the problem of "unidentified flying objects" b. Whether adequate study and research is
currently being directed to this problem in its relation c. What further investigation and research should be instituted, by whom, and under what aegis. 2. FACTS BEARING ON THE PROBLEM a. OSI has investigated the work currently being performed on flying saucers and has found that: (1) The only unit of
government currently studying the problem is the Directorate of (2) At ATIC there is
a small group consisting of a reserve Captain, two Lieutenants and two (3) A world-wide
reporting system has been instituted and major Air Force bases have been (4) The research
being carried on as strictly on a case basis and appears to be designed
solely (5) ATIC has
concluded an arrangement with Battelle Memorial Institute for the latter
to [ ] ================================================================ [ ] (6) Since 1947, ATIC
has received approximately 1500 official reports of sightings
plus an 3. DISCUSSION a. OSI entered into its inquiry fully aware that it was coming into a field already charged with partisanship, one in which objectivity had been overridden by numerous sensational writers, and one in which there are pressures for extravagant explanations as well as for oversimplification. The OSI Team consulted with a representative of Air Force Special Studies Group; discussed the problem with those in charge of the Air Force Project at Wright field; reviewed a considerable volume of intelligence reports; checked the Soviet press and broadcast indices; and conferred with three OSI consultants, all leaders in their scientific fields, who were chosen because of their broad knowledge of the technical areas concerned. b. OSI found that the ATIC study is probably valid if the purpose is limited to a case-by-case explanation. However, the study makes no attempt to solve the more fundamental aspect of the problem which is to determine definitely the nature of the various phenomena which are causing these sightings, or to discover means by which these causes and their visual and electronic effects may be immediately identified. Our consultant panel stated that these solutions would probably be found on the margins or just beyond the frontiers of our present phenomena, with the added possibility that our present dispersal of nuclear waste products might also be a factor. The recommended that a study group be formed to perform three functions: (1) Analyze and systematize the factors of information which form the fundamental problem; (2) Determine the
fields of fundamental science which must be investigated in order to
reach (3) Make recommendations for the initiation of appropriate research. Dr. Julius A. Stratton, Vice President of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, has indicated to OSI that such a group could be constituted at that Institute. Similarly, Project Lincoln, the Air force air defense project at MIT, could be charged with these responsibilities [ ] ================================================================ [ ] 4. CONCLUSION a. The flying saucer situation contains two elements of danger which, in a situation of international tension, have national security implications. These are: (1) Psychological
- With word-wide sightings reported, it was found that, up to the time
of (a) Could be controlled, (b) Could be predicted, and
(c) Could be used from a psychological warfare point of view
either offensively or
The public concern with the phenomena, which is reflected in the United
States press and in (2) Air
Vulnerability - The United States Air Warning System will
undoubtedly always depend b. Both of these problems are primarily operational in nature but each contains readily apparent intelligence factors. From an operational point of view, three actions are required: (1) Immediate steps
should be taken to improve identification of both visual and electronic [ ] ================================================================ [ ] (2) A study should
be instituted to determine what, if any, utilization could be made of
these (3) A national
policy should be established as to what should be told the public
regarding the c. Intelligence problems include: (1) The present level of Russian knowledge regarding these phenomena (2) Possible Soviet
intentions and capabilities to utilize these phenomena to the detriment
of (3) The reasons for silence in the Soviet Press regarding flying saucers. d. Intelligence responsibilities in this field as regards both collection and analysis can be discharged with maximum effectiveness only after much more is known regarding the exact nature of these phenomena. e. The problem transcends the level of individual departmental responsibilities, and is of such importance as to merit cognizance and action by the National Security Council. f. Additional research, differing in character and emphasis from that presently being performed by Air Force, will be required to meet the specific needs of both operations and intelligence. 5. RECOMMENDATIONS It is recommended that: a. The Director of Central Intelligence advise the National Security Council of the security implications inherent in the flying saucer problem with the request that, under his statutory coordinating authority, The Director of Central Intelligence be empowered to institute through the appropriate agencies, either within or without the government, the investigation and research necessary to solve the problem of instant positive identification of "unidentified flying objects". b. CIA, under its assigned responsibilities, and in cooperation with the psychological strategy board immediately investigate possible offensive or defensive utilization of the phenomena for psychological warfare purposes both for and against the United States, advising those agencies charged with U.S. internal security of any pertinent [ ] ================================================================ [
] findings affecting their areas of responsibility. c. On the basis of these programs of research, CIA develop and recommend for adoption by the National Security Council a policy of public information which will minimize the risk of panic.
H. MARSHALL CHADWELL OSI PGStrong:bxd (11 September 1952) Orig.& 4 - Addressee - 5 - [ ] ================================================================ [ ]
1. Recently an inquiry was conducted by the Office of Scientific Intelligence to determine Whether there are national security implications in the problem of "unidentified flying objects", i.e., flying saucers; whether adequate study and research is currently being directed to this problem in its relation to such national security implications; and what further investigation and research should be instituted, by whom, and under what aegis. 2. It was found that the only unit of Government currently studying the problem is the Directorate of Intelligence, USAF, which has charged the Air Technical Intelligence Center (ATIC) with responsibility for investigating the reports of sightings. At ATIC there is a group of three officers and two secretaries to which come, through official channels, all reports of sightings. This group conducts investigation of the reports, consulting as required with other Air Force and civilian technical personnel. A world-wide reporting system has been instituted and major Air Force Bases have been ordered to make interceptions of unidentified flying objects. The research is being conducted on a case basis and is designed to provide a satisfactory explanation of each individual sighting. ATIC has concluded an arrangement with Battelle Memorial Institute for the latter to establish a machine indexing system for official reports of sightings. 3. Since 1947, ATIC has received approximately 1500 official reports of sightings plus an enormous volume of letters, phone calls and press reports. During July 1952 alone, official reports totaled 250. Of the 1500 reports, Air Force carries 20 percent as unexplained and of those received January through July 1952 it carries 26 percent unexplained. 4. In its inquiry into this problem, a team from CIA's Office of Scientific Intelligence consulted with a representative of Air Force Special Studies Group; discussed the problem with those in charge of the Air Force Project at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base; reviewed a considerable volume of intelligence reports; checked the Soviet press and broadcast indices; and conferred with three CIA consultants, who have broad knowledge of the technical areas concerned. [ ] ================================================================ 5. It was found that the ATIC study is probably valid if the purpose is limited to a case-by-case explanation. However, that study does not solve the more fundamental aspect of the problem. These aspects are to determine definitely the nature of the various phenomena which are causing these sightings, or to discover means by which these causes and their visual or electronic effects, may be identified immediately. The CIA consultants stated that these solutions would probably be found on the margins or just beyond the frontiers of our present knowledge in the fields of atmospheric, ionospheric, and extraterrestrial phenomena, with the added possibility that our present dispersal of nuclear waste products might also be a factor. The recommended that a study group be formed to perform three functions: (a) Analyze and systematize the factors which constitute the fundamental problem; (b) Determine
the fields of fundamental science which must be investigated in order to
reach (c) Make recommendations for the initiation of appropriate research. Dr. Julius A. Stratton, Vice President of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, has indicated to CIA that such a group could be constituted at that Institute. Similarly, Project Lincoln, the Air Force's air defense project at MIT, could be charged with some of these responsibilities. 6. The flying saucer situation contains two elements of danger which, in a situation of international tension, have national security implications. These are: (a) Psychological
- With world-wide sightings reported, it was found that, up to the time
of (1) Could be controlled, (2) Could be predicted, and
(3) Could be used from a psychological warfare point of view
either offensively or - 2 - ================================================================ [ ] The public concern with the phenomena, which is reflected both in the United States press and in the pressure of inquiry upon the Air Force, indicates that a fair proportion of our population is mentally conditioned to the acceptance of the incredible. In this fact lies the potential for the touching-off of mass hysteria and panic. b. Air
Vulnerability - The United States Air Warning System will
undoubtedly always depend 7. Both of these problems are primarily operational in nature but each contains readily apparent intelligence factors. 8. From an operational point of view, three actions are required: (a) Immediate steps should be taken to improve identification of both visual and electronic phantom so that in the event of an attack, instant and positive identification of enemy planes or missiles can be made. (b) A study should be instituted to determine what, if any, utilization could be made of these phenomena by United States psychological warfare planners and what, if any, defenses should be planned in anticipation of Soviet attempts to utilize them. (c) In order to minimize risk of panic, a national policy should be established as to what should be told the public regarding the phenomena, 9. Other intelligence problems which require determination are: (a) The present level of Soviet knowledge regarding these phenomena (b) Possible
Soviet intentions and capabilities to utilize these phenomena to the
detriment of - 3 - ================================================================ [ ] (c) The reasons for silence in the Soviet Press regarding flying saucers. 10. Additional research, differing in character and emphasis from that presently being performed by Air Force, will be required to meet the specific needs of both operations and intelligence. Intelligence responsibilities in this field as regards both collection and analysis can be discharged with maximum effectiveness only after much more is known regarding the exact nature of these phenomena. 11. I consider this problem to be of such importance that it should be brought to the attention of the National Security Council in order that a community-wide coordinated effort towards its solution may be initiated.
/s/ HM Chadwell
[ ] ================================================================ [
] ER - 3 - 2872 OCT 2 1952
1. PROBLEM - To determine: (a) Whether or not there are national security implications in the problem of "unidentified flying objects"; (b) Whether or not adequate study and research is currently being directed to this problem in its relation to such national security implications; and (c) What further investigation and research should be instituted, by whom, and under what aegis. 2. FACTS AND DISCUSSION - OSI has investigated the work currently being performed on "flying saucers" and found that the Air Technical Intelligence Center, DI, USAF, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, is the only group devoting appreciable effort and study to this subject, that ATIC is concentrating on a case-by-case explanation of each report, and that this effort is not adequate to correlate, evaluate, and resolve the situation on an overall basis. The current problem is discussed in detail in TAB A. 3. CONCLUSIONS - "Flying saucers" pose two elements of danger which have national security implications. The first involves mass psychological considerations and the second concerns the vulnerability of the United States to air attack. Both factors are amplified in TAB A. 4. ACTION RECOMMENDED - (a) That the Director of Central Intelligence advise the National Security Council of the implications of the "flying saucer" problem and request that research be initiated. TAB B is a draft memorandum to the NSC, for the DCI's signature. (b) That the DCI discuss this subject with the Psychological Strategy Board. A memorandum to the Director, Psychological Strategy Board, is attached for signature as TAB C. (c) That CIA, with the cooperation of PSB and other interested departments and agencies, develop and recommend for adoption by the NSC a [ ] ================================================================ [ ] policy of public information which will minimize concern and possible panic resulting from the numerous sightings of unidentified objects.
/s/ HM Chadwell ANNEXES: CONCURRENCES: Date:
_________________
______________________ ACTION BY APPROVING AUTHORITY: Date: _________________ Approved (disapproved)
_____________________ [ ] ================================================================ [ ] 13 October 1952
1. Flying unidentified objects (Flying Saucers) have been the subject of Air Force investigation and analysis because of the possibility that such objects might conceivably be an attack on the U.S. If they are not, it is conceivable that the enemy might take advantage of the confusion created by the [by the] Flying Saucers to use at his convenience some air weapon against the United States. 2. Thus far Defense Department conducted research in this area has been confined to the effort by A-2 through ATIC with the result that an explanation has been provided on all but 20 per cent of the total 1500 reported sightings of Flying Saucers. 3. Determination of the scientific capabilities of the USSR to create and control Flying Saucers as a weapon against the United States is a primary concern of the CIA/OSI. Its review of existing information does not lead to the conclusion that the saucers are USSR created or controlled. It is the view of OSI that collection of intelligence information on the capabilities of the USSR to produce, launch, and control Flying Saucers and the analysis of such data as might be collected cannot be very effective until there is adequate fundamental scientific research launched to clarify the nature and causes of Flying Saucers and to devise means whereby they might be instantly identified. 4. The major scientific intelligence problems in respect to saucers are: a. What is the present level of Soviet knowledge regarding these phenomena? b.
What are possible Soviet capabilities to utilize these phenomena to the
detriment of US c. What effect do flying saucers have on our warning system. [
] ================================================================ [ ] 5. Conclusions: a. The instigation of fundamental scientific research is the primary responsibility of the Defense Department.
{, after
IAC,}
{(alternatively: The NSC)} c. It is far too early in view of the present state of our knowledge regarding Flying Saucers for psychological warfare planners to start planning how the United States might use U.S. Flying Saucers against the enemy. d. When intelligence has submitted the National Estimate on Flying Saucers there will be the time and basis for a public policy to reduce or restrain mass hysteria.
/s/ James Q. Reber
[ ] ================================================================ [ ] DRAFT COVER SHEET INTELLIGENCE ADVISORY COMMITTEE Flying Unidentified Objects (Flying Saucers)
{(Alternatively: The NSC)} 2. While it is recognized that the implications of Flying Saucers are of primary concern to the Defense Department in carrying out its responsibility to defend the United States, it is also believed that intelligence must request of appropriate authority such assistance as it needs to carry out its responsibility. It is believed that the scientific research required and the intelligence research contingent thereon can be most fruitful if they go hand in hand. 3. Recommendations: a. That the IAC concur in the proposed letter to the secretary of Defense. b. That
the IAC request the Watch Committee to give close attention to
indications which [ ] ================================================================ [ ] MEMORANDUM FOR: Secretary of Defense {(Alternatively: The NSC)} SUBJECT: Unidentified Flying Objects (Flying Saucers) 1. The IAC has reviewed the current situation concerning unidentified flying objects which have caused extensive speculation in the press and have been the subject of concern to Government organizations. The Air Force, within the limitations of manpower which could be devoted to the subject, has thus far carried the full responsibility for investigating and analyzing individual reports of sightings. Since 1947, approximately 1500 official reports of sightings have been received and, of these, about 20% are as yet unexplained. 2. It is my view and that of the IAC that this situation has possible implications for our national security with respect to the vulnerability of the U.S. to air attack. Intelligence, however, cannot discharge its responsibilities with regard to estimating the capabilities of an enemy to create and use such phenomena against the U.S. unless we first determine through scientific research whether or not such phenomena can in fact be generated and controlled by humans. 3. It is therefore recommended, that the Department of Defense {(be directed to)} undertake an expanded scientific research program to reveal the nature of the various phenomena which are causing these sightings and means by which these phenomena may be identified immediately. It is also recommended that in such a project there be close cooperation between those conducting research and scientific and technical intelligence research. The IAC agencies are prepared to do their part in such a project. 4. It is therefore recommended, that this Agency and the agencies of the Department of Defense be directed to formulate and carry out a program of intelligence and research activities required to solve the problem of instant positive identification of unidentified flying objects. A draft of an appropriate directive is attached. [
] {DCI} ================================================================ [ ] 14 October 1952 MEMORANDUM FOR RECORD SUBJECT: Flying Saucers Problem 1. At an informal discussion between DD/I, AD/IC, and Acting AD/SI, it was agreed that the saucer problem should be attacked by getting together the responsible individuals in the community to work out a program of research and intelligence which can then be implemented by them directly. The agreed program can then be forwarded to the DCI and possibly the Secretary of Defense and the balance of the National Security Council as an established program rather than waiting for a great deal of formal, high level paper pushing before taking action. 2. DD/I directed Acting AD/SI to contact Dr. Whitman and Gen. Samford to arrange an appropriate time at which this problem can be reviewed. Acting AD/SI to call on Dr. Whitman and review the background of our study before the meeting. 3. Subsequently, Acting AD/SI was advised that the most convenient days for this meeting would be Monday or Tuesday, 20 or 21 October. Those present would be:
Dr. Walter G. Whitman, Chairman, RDB plus others deemed appropriate by the principals.
/s/ Ralph L. Clark CC: Chief, Opns/SI - 1 {22 aug request} [ ] ================================================================ [ ] DEC 2 1952
1. On 20 August, the DCI, after a briefing by OSI on the above subject, directed the preparation of an NSCID for submission to the Council stating the need for investigation and directing agencies concerned to cooperate in such investigations. 2. In attempting to draft such a directive and the supporting staff studies, it became apparent to DD/I, acting AD/SI and AD/IC that the problem was largely a research and development problem, and it was decided by DD/I at attempt to initiate action through R&DB. A conference was held between DI/USAF, Chairman of the R&DB, DD/I, Acting AD/SI and AD/IC at which time it was decided that Dr. Whitman, Chairman of R&DB, would investigate the possibility of undertaking research and development studies through Air Force agencies. 3. On approximately 6 November, we were advised by Chairman R&DB, that inquiries in the Air Staff did not disclose "undue concern" over this matter, but that it had been referred to the Air Defense Command for consideration. No further word has been received from R&DB. 4. Recent reports reaching CIA indicated that further action was desirable and another briefing by the cognizant A-2 and ATIC personnel was held on 25 November. At this time, the reports of incidents convince us that there is something going on that must have immediate attention. The details of some of these incidents have been discussed by AD/SI with DDCI. Sightings of unexplained objects at great altitudes and traveling at high speeds in the vicinity of major U.S. defense installations are of such nature that they are not attributable to natural phenomena or known types of aerial vehicles. 5. OSI is proceeding to the establishment of a consulting group of sufficient competence and stature to review this matter and convince the responsible authorities in the community that immediate research and development on this subject must be undertaken. This can be done expeditiously under the aegis of CENIS. [ ] ================================================================ [ ] - 2 - 6. Attached hereto is a draft memorandum to the NSC and a simple draft NSC Directive establishing this matter as a priority project throughout the intelligence and defense research and development community.
/s/ H.M. Chadwell Attachments: Distribution: [ ] ================================================================ [
]
1. The Central Intelligence Agency has reviewed the current situation concerning unidentified flying objects which have caused extensive speculation in the press and have been the subject of concern to Government organizations. The Air Force, within the limitations of manpower which could be devoted to the subject, has thus far carried the full responsibility for investigating and analyzing individual reports of sightings. Since 1947, approximately 2000 official reports of sightings have been received and, of these, about 20% are as yet unexplained. 2. It is my view that this situation has possible implications for our national security which transcend the interests of a single service. A broader, coordinated effort should be initiated to develop a firm scientific understanding of the several phenomena which apparently are involved in these reports, and to assure ourselves that the incidents will not hamper our efforts in the Cold War or confuse our early warning system in case of an attack. 3. I therefore recommend that this Agency and the agencies of the Department of Defense be directed to formulate and carry out a program of intelligence and research activities required to solve the problem of instant positive identification of unidentified flying objects. A draft of an appropriate directive is attached.
Walter B. Smith Enclosure [ ] ================================================================ [ ] D R A F T NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL DIRECTIVE SUBJECT: Unidentified flying objects Pursuant to the provisions of section 102 of the National Security Act of 1947 and for the purposes annunciated in Paragraphs d and e thereof, the National Security Council hereby authorizes and directs that: 1. The Director of Central Intelligence shall formulate and carry out a program of intelligence and research activities as required to solve the problem of instant positive identification of unidentified flying objects. 2. Upon call of the Director of Central Intelligence, Government departments and agencies shall provide assistance in this program of intelligence and research to the extent of their capacity provided, however, that the DCI shall avoid duplication of activities presently directed toward the solution of this problem. 3. This effort shall be coordinated with the military services and the Research and Development Board of the Department of Defense, with the Psychological Board and other Governmental agencies as appropriate. 4. The Director of Central Intelligence shall disseminate information concerning the program of intelligence and research activities in this field to the various departments and agencies which have authorized interest therein. [ ] ================================================================ [
] 3 December 1952 MEMORANDUM FOR RECORD SUBJECT: Flying Saucers 1. At 1100 yesterday morning I met with Dr. Julius A. Stratton, Executive Vice President and Provost of Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Dr. Max Millikan, Director of CENIS. I briefed them on the various new reports of sightings including the Limestone Base Case, The Florida Scout Master, the Utah Motion Pictures, etc. I also brought Dr. Stratton up to date on developments which had occurred since our previous discussion of the subject in August. Dr. Stratton reiterated his earlier position that this is a subject which must be investigated and he said that probably the best means of getting a thoroughly competent review of the problem would be through Project LINCOLN. He said, however, that in view of the delicate position in relation to Air Force, as a result of the "Summer Study Report", any acceptance of this project by LINCOLN must be based on Air Force concurrence or on an independent proposal from one of the other services. He said that Alfred Hill would be the best man to head the group. Assuming that it might prove impractical to place the Project at LINCOLN, we explored other possibilities including Princeton and Cal Tech. Dr. Stratton felt very strongly that Cal Tech would be the better of the two in view of the presence there of Robertson, Lauritson, Spitzer (on temporary duty from Princeton), Millikan's brother and others. Dr. Stratton asked particularly that we keep him informed of the progress that we make in having this problem investigated as he is personally very interested as well as fully aware of the potential danger and implications of the situation. 2. Following the meeting with Drs. Stratton and Millikan, I had lunch at the Faculty Club with Lloyd Berkner and Jerrold Zacharias and briefed them on the recent cases and our feelings regarding their implications. Berkner, while apparently interested in taking a personal part, felt strongly that the saucer problem should be thoroughly investigated from a scientific point of view. Zacharias did not appear to be greatly interested in the problem and made only one suggestion, i.e. that Shirley Quimby of Columbia University be brought into the picture. Quimby took his physics degree at the same time as Zacharias; is now at Columbia University, having during the war been a Navy scientist working on ASW. Zacharias suggested Quimby because the latter is probably the most expert man in the country on magic and general chicanery. 3. My conclusion from these conversations is that it will probably be necessary to secure the full backing of DCI in order that a scientific review of this problem may be laid on. Without this backing, it would probably be impossible to secure the Air Force cooperation which would be necessary, particularly in the matter of the availability of reports, etc., [
] /s/ P.G. Strong Orig - Subject ================================================================ [ S E C R E T ] INTELLIGENCE ADVISORY COMMITTEE Minutes of Meeting Held in Director's Acting Deputy Director (Intelligence) MEMBERS PRESENT Mr. W. Park Armstrong, Jr., Special Assistant, Intelligence
Department of State ALSO PRESENT Dr. Sherman Kent, Central Intelligence Agency
Richard D. Drain DECLASSIFIED PER SEC 3(A),
EO11652 [ S E C R
E T ] ================================================================ Approval of Minutes 1. Action: The minutes of the last meeting, 1 December 1952 (IAC-M-89), were approved. Conditions and Trends in Latin 2. Action: Approved with minor modifications. Unidentified Flying Objects 3. Action: The Director of Central Intelligence will: a. Enlist the
services of selected scientists to review and appraise the available
evidence in the b. Draft
and circulate to the IAC a proposed NSCID, which would signify the IAC
concern 4. Discussion: The Acting Chairman, Mr. Amory, presented to the committee the DCI's request that this subject be informally discussed. Dr. Chadwell briefly reviewed the evidence and peripheral considerations, and noted that most of the available evidence is processed by ATIC. General Samford offered his full cooperation. It was recognized that the problem is best approached if directly related to specific problems of intelligence and defense. It was thought desirable that the action noted above under "a" be undertaken immediately, with consideration of a proposed NSCID to depend in some measure on the results achieved by the scientists' studies. [ S E C R E T ] ================================================================ [ SECRET ]
1. In accordance with your request, I interviewed Mr. Irving Weston of the Field Engineering and Monitoring Division of the FCC to determine whether the Commission at present has any knowledge of unexplained radio signals which might possibly be connected with unidentified flying saucers. 2. Unless such signals were reasonably persistent or were causing interference to established services, it is unlikely that they would be intercepted,
{be} 3. The Commission has operating 12 full time monitoring stations and 6 part time monitoring stations. Two (2) of the stations are in Alaska and one (1) in Hawaii. Because of the short range of frequencies above 30 mc/s., monitoring between 30 and about 200 mc/s. is confined pretty much to transmitters in the immediate vicinity. Most of the monitoring stations have equipment for higher frequencies, including the AH/APR-4 receiver, but make little use thereof. VHF monitoring is done to some extent by traveling inspectors with automobile receivers. It seemed likely using the example of the concerted effort to identify the first diathermy signals back in 1935 and the more recent efforts which preceded the explanation of the VHF "bursts", that any persistent occurrences of radio signals that might come from flying saucers, if below 30 mc/s., would soon be the object of considerable interest at the FCC and elsewhere. 4. The FCC maintains a file in the Briggs Building of all reported intercepts of all its monitoring stations by frequency and by call letters extending back three or four years. this file is particularly valuable in the recognition of new signals which may be reported. Information tabulated includes frequency, call letters, type of emission, service, monitoring station reporting, and an intercept supporting the identification. 5. Classification of the discussion was considered Secret.
/s/ HU Graham [ SECRET ] ================================================================ [ ] 9 December 1952 MEMORANDUM FOR RECORD SUBJECT: Unidentified Flying Objects 1. At 1015 hours today I talked by telephone with Captain Edward J. Ruppelt (Chief, Aerial Phenomena Branch, Analysis Division, ATIC). The purpose of the call was to determine if Captain Ruppelt would be in Washington during the next few days so that he might meet with Dr. Robertson. Also, if there had been any developments in the Limestone-Presque Isle case. 2. Captain Ruppelt stated that he had put in a request to come to Washington last week but that he had been "running into a snag" in getting away and he intimated that his intention to specifically visit CIA may have been the difficulty. By oblique references it was determined that Colonel Donald L. Bower (chief, Analysis Division) was blocking his trip. Note: If this is true, it is difficult to understand since Colonel Bower, in discussions with E. Tauss and myself on 25 November, indicated complete willingness for cooperation. Ruppelt stated that he would try again and hoped to be in Washington next week. I gave no indication of the agreements reached on this subject in the IAC meeting on 4 December. 3. Regarding the Limestone-Presque Isle case, Captain Ruppelt reported that the observation is suspected of being the planet Saturn. A sighting of Saturn with the same theodolite will be made within the next few days. An examination of this data with possible theodolite reading errors should indicate whether the sighting could conceivably have been of this planet. I find it difficult to believe that the moons of Saturn could bee seen visibly. 4. Captain Ruppelt stated that he had a package of analyses and reports which he desired to have O/SI study and was planning to hand-carry to Washington. I mentioned that someone from O/SI might be making a trip to ATIC within the next week or so. Ruppelt stated that he would be pleased to [
] ================================================================ [
] hear from me at any time. His office telephone number is Dayton, Ohio, Kenmore 7111, Extension 65365 and his home telephone number is Walnut 7113.
/s/ F C Durant OSI/FCDurant:bm Distribution: ================================================================ [
]
1. The following is a summary of the current situation with respect to the investigation of unidentified flying objects. Recent incidents include: a.
Movies of ten (10) unidentified flying objects (unexplained on the basis
of natural b.
A very brilliant unidentified light over the coast of Maine for about
four hours on the night c.
Alleged contact with a device on the ground in Florida late this summer
which left some d.
Numerous other sightings of lights or objects which either in
configuration or performance 2. In furtherance of IAC action of 4 December, O/SI has been working with Dr. H. P. Robertson, consultant (former director of Research, WCTC), toward establishing a panel of top scientists and engineers in the fields of astrophysics, nuclear energy, electronics, etc. to review this situation. Wholehearted cooperation has been secured by DI/USAF and ATIC, and a visit by AD/SI, Dr. Robertson, and Mr. Durant of SI to ATIC is planned for Friday. It is hoped to organize the panel and undertake substantive scientific review of this subject within the next two to three weeks.
H. MARSHALL CHADWELL ================================================================ THE JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY OPERATING UNDER
CONTRACT
TELEPHONE Dr. H. P. Robertson Dear H. P.: Here is that article you mentioned from the New Yorker, which I found most interesting and informative. I have listed below a few items which seemed to me to need further discussion: Patrol Cameras Fred Whipple at Harvard has had considerable experience in developing and using small, equatorially mounted cameras. These are exposed for several hours through a rotating sector, and show meteor trail as a series of dashes an a background of stars, this providing the meteor angular velocity. In many cases two such cameras are used, separated by several miles, so that the space track of the meteor can be derived. As I recall, meteor patrol cameras have been used in the vicinity of Boston and southern New Mexico only. All the photographs are preserved, and I am sure there have been no unidentified objects of any type to date. A possible modification of this technique which would provide more complete coverage is to use the Greenstein-Henyey wide-angle camera, which photographs 160 deg. of the sky at once. Such a camera is in use at Yerkes Observatory and is reported most recently in a paper by Sharpless and Osterbrook in the Astrophysical Journal, 1951. The major difficulty of operation would be changing the film, which might be made automatic. Another use of cameras could be on selected ground radar scopes. Possibly such a camera should be kept in stand-by status and triggered by the operator when unidentified objects are on the screen. The issue of light, hand-held cameras to aircraft pilots is another fair possibility noted in the New Yorker article. Study of Communications Systems One of our ORO projects is undertaking such a study, and has collected a large amount of literature. The British Army Operational Research Group has made several studies of air raid reporting systems as used in exercises, which show the distortion and "noise" introduced in any reporting system. There is a possibility of obtaining comparable ================================================================ Dr. Robertson 12 December 1952 data on such false alarms to fire departments and "flaps" in several military situations (such as North Africa in 1942). I have been intrigued with the electronic analogue of a communications system with feedback. The circumstances leading to instability of such a system might be measured if a simple theory can be postulated; e.g., if something analogous to impedance of the circuit determines instability. Mass Psychology It is clear that a simple statement has not and will not convince the public. A psychologist may have some theoretical framework in which past "flaps" of this kind can be analyzed and the results extended to the present difficulty. General Requirement It seems to me that the major difficulty as present is the lack of a well-defined attitude among responsible officials: either there is or there is not convincing evidence of significant phenomena. To resolve this question it must be decided in advance what level of completeness is necessary in explaining reports, and what indications of hostile intent are necessary to make the reported objects of importance. It might help to point out the difference between open-mindedness and indecision, and to suggest some level of credulity below which reports will not even be considered. Dr. Aden B. Meinel who is an assistant professor of astrophysics at the Yerkes Observatory, who has been concerned with the photography of aurora and who has designed complex wide-angle cameras for the Air Force under a contract with Boston University, might be helpful in discussion of cameras noted above and of auroral phenomena. However, the Air Force authorities here have no record of his clearance. If you are interested in him, we could ask him by telephone what is clearance is and with what organization. Yours sincerely,
/s/ Thornton ================================================================ [ ] DEC 18 1952
1. Pursuant to the request of the Director, the following amplification of Reference (b) and review of the current situation is submitted. A preliminary review of the USAF investigation of this subject has been completed. With respect to the recent incidents enumerated in reference (b), additional information has been obtained which is appended as Tab A. 2. A trip to the Air Technical Intelligence Center was made on Friday, 12 December by AD/SI, Dr. H. P. Robertson (consultant), and Mr. F. C. Durant (operations Staff/SI). During this visit the O/SI group was briefed on the current status of he investigation, and copies of selected case studies and progress reports were obtained. This material has been subsequently studied in detail. 3. There still exists no reasonable evidence that the objects sighted are of foreign origin. While there is no indication that these objects represent a direct threat to the national defense, there are certain potential dangers which are related to these sightings. As a result of the trip and these conclusions. O/SI is proceeding with plans to convene a group (probably not more than three), of top level consultants in the fields of physics (radar and upper atmosphere), astrophysics and astronomy, to review the evidence and recommend with respect to: a. Methodology of investigation of unidentified flying objects. b. Instrumentation to obtain data in future sightings. c. Methods of rapid identification of unidentified flying objects. d. Desirability for convening of a larger panel. We are deferring for the present the convening of a large panel of diverse scientific interests for a detailed review of the substantive aspects of the problem because of insufficient and incomplete data. [
] ================================================================ [ ] [
]
(signed R. L. Clark) Enclosure - Tab A Distribution: OSI:RLC:FCD/mtr [
] ================================================================ [ ] 1. Motion Pictures, Tremonton, Utah This case involves the sighting and photographing (Kodachrome film) of ten bright lights moving across the sky on 2 July 1952 in rough formation. Source is a Chief Photographer's Mate, USN, with 17 years photographic experience. The local time was 1110; weather conditions bright, clear, no clouds. Objects appeared to be 'milling about' while traveling in a westerly direction across the sky. Source was driving along the road when the sighting occurred. He stopped the car and photographed the event with his personal camera. Toward the end of the sighting, one object separated from the rest and reversed course across the sky. Status: ATIC Photographic Laboratory examination of the film resulted in following conclusions: a. 10 objects, all alike in movement and size. b. Decidedly improbable that they are birds or balloons. c.
Exact nature cannot be determined, because they are visible only as
small spots of light. d.
Apparently a coordination of movement to some extent among these
objects. They seem e. The movements suggest flight paths consisting of skew curves in space. f.
The single object which reversed course remained reasonably uniform in
brightness. It g.
It would probably be extremely difficult to imitate this photography for
fraudulent This film is currently under examination by the U.S. Navy Photo Interpretation Laboratory, Anacostia. Estimated completion date: 15 January 1953. [ ] ================================================================ [ ] 2. Bright Light sighted from Presque Isle and Limestone Air Force Bases, Maine This sighting occurred the night of 10-11 October 1952 from 2300 to 0300 local time, by observers at the weather stations at these Air Force Bases. The description of the light was "circular orange object with four green lights nearby." Theodolite sightings of elevation and azimuth were obtained. Weather was clear. Status: A comparison of observed azimuths and elevations of the supposed object with the calculated position and relative motion of the planet Jupiter leave little doubt that the observed object was actually Jupiter. 3. Reported Sightings of a Strange Object in Florida This sighting was reported by a Boy Scoutmaster to have occurred at 2150 local time on 19 August 1952 near West Palm Beach, Florida. According to the story given, the source was driving along deserted road in his car, together with four Boy Scouts. Sighting a strange light, source stopped his car, cautioned the boys to wait, and entered the palmetto undergrowth alone. When he did not return in a few minutes, and witnessing some strange lights in the vicinity of the scoutmaster, the boys went for help, returning with a deputy sheriff. The scoutmaster appeared, badly frightened, slightly burned on the forearms. His story was that he had see a large circular object about eight feet over his head which had released a "fire ball" which descended on him. He stated that he had thrown himself on the ground and "blacked out." There wee various other embroideries to the story. His cap was burned slightly and samples of grass taken from the immediate vicinity if the "sighting" differed strangely in appearance from samples 75 yards away. Status: The background of the source indicates a unsavory personal reputation and criminal record, resulting in the belief that the report may have been an elaborate hoax. However, the unusual condition of the grass samples is currently unexplained. This fact, together with other aspects of the case, leave final determination in doubt at this time. - 2 - ================================================================ THE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY GRADUATE SCHOOL Dr. H. M. Chadwell Dear Dr. Chadwell: In pursuance of our telephone conversation of the other day, and in accordance with your request, I am confirming in writing the results I transmitted to you over the phone. It is well known that in theodolite observations, elevations can be generally obtained more accurately than azimuths since the former depend only on accurate leveling but the latter depend upon a determination of the true north. Since most theodolite observers are interested in relative rates and not in absolute positions, it is no surprise that they do not pay too much attention to the exact determination of their zero points. Further, it is quite easy for even an observer of some experience to make an error in reading of some multiple of whole degrees. The observation made at Limestone, therefore, can very well be assumed to have both zero point error and an incorrect scale reading. At the mean time of the observation, calculations made at the observatory here show that Jupiter had, at Presque Isle, an azimuth of 163 deg. and an elevation of 58.5 deg. This alone is [a] sufficiently close to the mean of the readings from two stations to serve as strong evidence that the object observed was Jupiter. However, the clinching argument comes when one compares Jupiter's rate of motion in elevation and azimuth during the observation and the rates noted on the theodolite, at Presque Isle. The computed increment in elevation was 0.2 degrees (as compared to the observed 0.3 degrees) and the corresponding increment in azimuth was 1.8 degrees (as against the observed 1.9 degrees). In view of this strikingly close agreement in rates as well as general position in the sky, it would be an outrage to probability theory to consider the object observed was anything other than the time-honored planet Jupiter. The prosecution rests its case! Wishing you the very best greetings of the season, I remain, Sincerely yours,
/s/ J. Allen Hynek JAH/n ================================================================ 2800 Quebec Street, N. W. 29 December 1952
Professor J. Allen Hynek Dear Professor Hynek: Thank you very much indeed for your letter of 23 December confirming the astronomical calculations transmitted earlier by telephone. We are in agreement with your findings and appreciate your assistance in this matter. It was a pleasure to renew our acquaintance at Dayton and to learn of your consultant work. I hope that we shall see you again in the not too distant future. With best wishes for the coming year, Cordially yours,
/s/ HM Chadwell Distribution: OSI:FCDurant/mtw (29Dec52) ================================================================ PROJECT MATTERHORN December 30, 1952 Mr. Frederick C. Durant Dear Mr. Durant Summarizing our discussion of today of the problem which you and Professor H. P. Robertson have brought to my attention, I have learned that the question at issue has no directly visualizable connection with the work which I am doing for the Atomic Energy Commission. However, I have discovered that the question at issue is both interesting scientifically and has important defense aspects. You have asked me whether I could Take part in a meeting in Washington about the subject beginning Monday, January twelfth, lasting for five days. In reply I reported that I am perfectly willing to take part in such an interesting evaluation and planning session, if this participation is considered appropriate by the Atomic Energy Commission; or, in particular, by General Kenneth Fields, head of the Division of Military Applications. My primary obligation is to carry out the program for the Commission for which I am responsible here at Princeton. I consider this sufficiently important that I would not feel it appropriate to take part in these sessions in question unless told by General Fields that he though this was advisable. Thanks for your very interesting briefing about a very fascinating problem. Sincerely yours,
/s/ John A Wheeler JAW:MMM cc: K. Fields ================================================================ ================================================================ UNDATED DOCUMENTS ================================================================ {ER - 3 - 3971} [
] Dear Mr. Becker: ? Dec 29, 1952 Confirming our brief conversation in the
hall the other day, I enclose a memorandum from General Maxwell on the
subject. We will advise you when we receive the report referred to
in Sincerely,
/s/Walter G. Whitman Enclosure (1) Mr. Loftus E. Becker (This document may be declassified upon removal of Confidential Attachment.) [
] ================================================================ The attachment, "a memorandum from General Maxwell on the subject" was not among the items supplied by the CIA ================================================================ [
]
1. It is proposed that an external research project be established so that the available evidence on Unidentified Flying Objects can be analyzed and evaluated by an Ad Hoc Panel of top-level scientists in order to recommend what further action should be taken toward solution of this problem. 2. The proposed project is an important part of the effort of this office to improve intelligence relating to Unidentified Flying Objects and would materially assist the O/SI Task Force which has been working on this problem in cooperation with the Air Force at the request of the DCI since 20 August 1952. 3. It is anticipated that the proposed project would be established through CENIS and would utilize their facilities to obtain the services of the personnel required for the panel. Discussions have been held on the matter with Dr. Max Millikan, Director of CENIS, who has indicated his approval. 4. The proposed project would cost approximately $5,000 which is the amount estimated to be necessary to pay for the expenses of the Panel members (travel, per diem etc.) and the administrative overhead cost for CENIS. 5. The proposed project would not duplicate any known CIA activity. 6. The proposed project will not duplicate any known Department of Defense efforts. U. S. Air Force personnel will participate in meetings with the Panel. 7. Classification of the proposed project would be SECRET. [ ] ================================================================ [ ]
3. It is requested that approval in principle be given for the proposed project so that preliminary negotiations may be undertaken. In due course, the project will be submitted for final approval.
H. MARSHALL CHADWELL CONCURRENCES: Signature: _______________________________ Date:
_________ ACTION BY APPROVING AUTHORITY: Approved (disapproved) in principle. Signature: _________________________________ Date: _________ [ ]
|
| C U F
O NSM The Computer UFO Network http://www.cufon.org/ SYSOP - Jim Klotz UFO Reporting and
Information Service
|
| Back to Top of this Page | On to Part 2 | To CUFON Main Page |