STATUS: Unknown *DATE: February 24, 1967 TIME: CLASS: R/V ground radar/ visual

Case Added: Aldrich
Initial Summary: UFO tracked for two minutes on FAA radar ; airport employee saw glowing orange object coinciding.@
NOTES: TBP
STATUS: TBP
DATE: March -- 1967 TIME: unknown CLASS: R/V ground-air radar/air visual

LOCATION: SOURCES: Fawcett & Greenwood 195

Air defence Weinstein AUER/VC, Vol. 4

radar site, Cuba
RADAR DURATION: unspecified
EVALUATIONS: No official

PRECIS: A USAF security specialist assigned to the 6947th Security Squadron of the Air Force Security Service (AFSS, a service subsidiary of the National Security Agency) stated that an air-intercept by Cuban Air Force MiG 21s on an object in Cuban airspace had been monitored by personnel of the Squadron's Detachment 'A' from the AFSS COMINT/SIGINT facility of Key West Naval Air Station on Boca Chica Key, east of Key West and 97 miles from the Cuban coast.
Communications intercept operators monitoring Cuban air defence radio transmissions heard radar controllers report an unidentified target entering Cuban airspace from the NE at an altitude of about 33,000' and at a speed of slightly less than Mach 1. Two MiG 21s were launched and vectored to within about 3 miles of the target by GCI radar operators. The flight leader reported a visual on a bright metallic sphere with no markings or appendages. When radio challenges went unmet, the leader was authorised to engage the intruder and reported that his AI radar was locked on and his missiles were armed. Seconds later the distressed voice of the wingman reported that his leader's aircraft had exploded, and his next transmission stated that the aircraft had broken up without any sign of smoke or flame. Ground radar then reported that the target accelerated rapidly and climbed to over 98,000' on a heading SSE out over the Caribbean.
NOTES: The source of this report is an anonymous former AFSS security specialist who approached physicist Stanton Friedman in early 1978, and therefore it falls in the category of hearsay. It is interesting, nevertheless, and some alleged background events are worth recording. The source stated that a mandatory Intelligence Spot Report went out immediately to NSA headquarters at Fort Meade, Maryland, but contrary to regulations NSA failed to acknowledge receipt. A follow-up report resulted within hours in an order to ship all data to NSA and list the Cuban aircraft loss as due to "equipment malfunction".

From February to July 1978 researcher Robert Todd attempted to locate more information on this incident by FOIA requests to the NSA, CIA, Air Force and Navy, without result. The CIA response suggested that Todd contact the Cuban government, and he notified the USAF and NSA of his intention to do so subject to their objection on security grounds within twenty days. This time the response was an intimidating visit from the FBI, who stated that they were acting at the instigation of the NSA in a matter of possible counterespionage. The agents pressed Todd to reveal the name of the source, which he was unable to do, and hinted at the possibility of indictments under the espionage laws. FBI spokesmen for the Philadelphia Field Office and headquarters, Washington, D.C. later refused to confirm or deny any investigation into Todd's activities. NSA spokesman Charles Sullivan also responded that he was not at liberty to discuss either the report or any action by the FBI. On August 4 1978 Todd was contacted by Major Gordon Finley, USAF, from the Office of the Air Force Judge Advocate General, who indicated that the report in Todd's possession may contain classified material, and requested that it be kept secure until it could be collected from him. It was never collected. But four days later Todd received a letter from the NSA stating that "This agency has located no record indicating that the incident . . . in fact occurred" but explaining that information about the manner in which the intelligence was allegedly collected was classified, and that such information from an AFSS source constituted "an unauthorized disclosure in violation of the law." In a further FOIA appeal to the Air Force Todd received the reply from Col. James Johnson, Judge Advocate General's Office, that although "the Air Force can neither confirm nor deny the authenticity" of the report, "if authentic, I am advised the statement would be classified Secret in its entirety." Todd had requested complete copies of his FOIA case file containing all documents generated by his initial request, but this was denied. What he received was a list of ten USAF documents about the case with their internal distribution lists, all of which were to remain classified under the national security exemptions of the Act.
The foregoing is not inconsistent with the authenticity of the report, but is not positive evidence even though the Air Force declined to deny that the event occurred as stated. And even if the event did occur as stated, this is not evidence that the cognizant US authorities regarded its cause as remarkable or unexplained. However, if the report is accurate, then ground- and air-radar contacts plus air-visual confirmation are persuasive prima facie indications of a real target. The reported radar-displayed speeds of around Mach 1 are inconsistent with a balloon (which the visual description most nearly resembles) even allowing excessively generous values for windspeeds between 33,000 and 100,000'. It is of course possible that the visual sighting was of a large balloon, coincidentally visible at the expected position of the ground radar target, and metallised components of the balloon or its unseen payload could have been responsible for the MiG 21's AI radar contact. The ground radar contacts may have been due to an intruding aircraft which went its way unmolested, to a misidentified friendly flight, or to some kind of propagation/interference anomaly. But such a scenario is a little improbable, and the catastrophic break-up of the interceptor - presumably due to premature detonation of an armed missile - would remain an uncomfortable coincidence.
One possibility which is worth considering is a reconnaissance overflight by a foreign power. Since 1948 the US has pursued a variety of classified ELINT/PHOTINT programmes employing balloons and dirigibles, from the early CIA/USAF Skyhook through to the Navy's abandoned High Altitude Superpressure Aerostat (HASPA), a large electric-powered helium airship for ocean surveillance, and its successor, Lockheed's HiSpot, an over-the-horizon-targeting platform capable of controlled flight and hovering for upwards of three months at extreme altitude with a 3 ton of ELINT sensors and a huge internal antenna. Some analogous project in early 1967 could have involved overflights of communist Cuba, still a strategically sensitive area following Khrushchev's removal of Soviet missiles in 1962. If the MiGs had fortuitously encountered such a platform this could explain both the reported visual appearance, and the apparent over sensitivity of the NSA to an incident of foreign aircraft loss: any admission of US technology in the area might create an awkward international incident.
Of course, the destruction of the MiG remains a coincidence on this hypothesis. However, certain types of AEW, reconnaissance and ELINT aircraft over the years have been fitted with defensive armament, even though this is not routine practice. A number of Soviet models have carried 25mm guns, usually in the tail and sometimes radar directed. Some British and American aircraft - presumably more likely culprits in this case - have provision for infrared air-toair missiles and would either be able to use their airborne radar equipment in passive mode to detect hostile signals or would be fitted, like almost all at-risk military aircraft, with dedicated radar warning receivers (RWRs). RWRs are capable of detecting when a hostile radar has stopped scanning, meaning that it has locked on and begun to track (hence the development of modern trackwhile-scan systems), and this situation must be construed as highly threatening. The lead MiG in this case was reportedly destroyed shortly after its pilot had radioed that his radar was locked on to the target and his missiles were armed, which is consistent with a preemptive missile attack. The scenario has some shortcomings, however, including the visual description of the intruder, the oddly clean destruction of the MiG, and the reported departure altitude of about 100,000' which would be beyond the maximum ceiling of known aircraft in 1967.

In summary it seems possible that the source in this case was genuinely in a position to impart sensitive information, and that communications intercepts did occur which related to some sort of incident in Cuban airspace. However, given the second hand nature of the report allowance has to be made for inaccuracies and embroideries. The possibility therefore exists that the core of the report describes an engagement by Cuban MiGs with a US reconnaissance overflight. The further possibility exists that US intelligence sources were aware that Cuba could not definitely identify the intruder, and deliberately "leaked" a phony air-radio intercept as a counterintelligence ploy. Unlikely as this may seem, there is some evidence that states have used the UFO rumour in this way - for example, reports in the Soviet state press during the '70s which were allowed to feed public speculation about UFOs, but which were later discovered to originate with secret military satellite launches from Plesetsk. In the present case, however, the likelihood of such a ploy is perhaps not very great, particularly considering that 10 years had elapsed between the reported date of the incident and the leak. What we are left with, then, is a tantalising story, but one which will almost certainly never be more than hearsay.

STATUS: Insufficient information
*DATE: March 2, 1967 TIME: CLASS: R/V ground radar/ visual
LOCATION: SOURCES: Hall UFOE II, 58, 243

White Sand Missile Range,

New Mexico
RADAR DURATION: minutes
EVALUATIONS:
Case Added: Aldrich
Initial Summary: AGroups of three to four UFOs tracked on radar sliver discs seen widely.@
NOTES: TBP
STATUS: TBP
DATE: March 5 1967 TIME: unknown CLASS: R/V

LOCATION: SOURCE: Fowler CUFOI 1981 187

Minot AFB Hall, UFOE II, pages 27 80-81, 243

N. Dakota
RADAR DURATION: unspecified
EVALUATION: No official

PRECIS: According to Raymond Fowler, a former US Air Force Security Service employee, NORAD (North American Air Defence Command) radar detected an uncorrelated target on a descending track over a Minuteman site of the 91st Strategic Missile Wing, Minot AFB. Alerted strike teams sighted a metallic, discshaped object with bright flashing lights moving slowly above the site and pursued it in three armed trucks. It stopped and hovered at 500', then

began to circle above a launch control facility. F 106 jets were ordered into the air, but before they could be launched the object climbed vertically at a very rapid rate and disappeared.

NOTES: The report contains no evaluable detail and must be considered as hearsay. Similar incidents were reported at US Northern Tier missile sites during the '70s, however, which were sometimes supported by official documentation. The report may be of interest historically.

STATUS: Insufficient information
*DATE: March 13 (11?), 1967 TIME: 2200 CST CLASS: GV/GR
LOCATION: SOURCES:

Tillamook, Oregon
RADAR DURATION: 4 hours, 38 minutes
EVALUATIONS: Project Blue Book: False radar returns
Case Added: Aldrich
University of Colorado Case #1212B
Initial Summary: Three lights lare than stars observed by 12 witnesses. Weather condition clar with some ground fog.
NOTES: TBP
STATUS: TBP

DATE: March 20 1967 TIME: unknown CLASS: R/V ground radar/ prob. ground visual
LOCATION: SOURCES: Fawcett & Greenwood 29, see also: Fowler

Malmstrom AFB

Montana RADAR DURATION: unspecified
EVALUATIONS: No official
PRECIS: A reported UFO sighting was "confirmed on radar". Interceptors were launched from Malmstrom, with results unknown. A flight of ten missiles, probably Minuteman, reportedly developed problems at about the same time.

NOTES: Missile malfunctions have been reported in similar circumstances. CF, Minuteman site, Lewiston, Montana, Nov. 7 1975, and anecdotal report by Ray Fowler.

STATUS: Insufficient information
*DATE: March 22, 1967 TIME: CLASS: R/V ground radar/air visual
LOCATION: SOURCES: Weinstein ACUERVC, Vol. 4

Bay of Biscay
RADAR DURATION: minutes

EVALUATIONS:
Case Added: Aldrich
Initial Summary: TBP
NOTES: TBP
STATUS: TBP
*DATE: March 24 1967 TIME: 2134Z CLASS: R/V ground radar/ air visual
LOCATION: SOURCES: Volunteer Flight Office Network (VFON) report form

A/C: 52 deg 21" N, 06 deg 12" W Weinstein AUER/VC vol. 4

Preston ground radar
RADAR DURATION: unspecified
EVALUATIONS: No official
VFON Report #682
Added case: Aldrich
Initial Summary: Irish Airlines Flight 275A heading on course of 300 degrees True at an altitude of 10,000 observed a white object about as bright as Venus ahead and at an elevation of about 10 degrees above the aircraft. The object was observed for about 6 minutes. It change color to pale green and then to red. Preston radar (G-PK) informed the crew that they had an target with a speed of about 150 knots.
NOTES: TBP
STATUS: TBP
*DATE: April 1967 TIME: CLASS: GV/GR
LOCATION: SOURCES: NICAP, UFO Investigator V 5, #1, May-June 1967

Brixham, Devon, England
RADAR DURATION:
EVALUATIONS:
Case Added: Aldrich
Initial Summary: A huge, cone-shaped UFO that slowly revolved, hovered for more than an hour, and shot away as an airplane approached was seen by members of Her Majesty's Coast Guard and others at Brixham, Devon, England at 11:25 a. m., April [1967]

3580.Coast Guardsman Brian F. Jenkins stated in his report to NICAP member J. A. Hennessey that the object was seen stationary at approximately 15,000 feet. It slowly drifted to the northwest during the next 80 minutes. It was slowly revolving, revealing a door like structure on its side as it did so. There was a curtain-like structure' at its bottom that changed shape during the flight.

At 12:40,' Jenkins stated, "an aircraft with a thick vapor trail approached the object from the northeast, flew above it and passed it, then turned and dived and approached the object from below, slowing down . . . until the vapor trail faded, and the aircraft was lost from sight. A few minutes later the object was lost in a cloud."

The UFO disappeared at an estimated 22,000 feet altitude.

According to May 21st edition of the London Sunday Express, an undetermined number of people along the Devon coast saw the UFO. Within minutes, the Royal Air Force submitted an account to the Ministry of Defense, who at first denied they had received any report, but then said that they did receive a report, but somehow it was not logged.

The object was also reported tracked on radar, according to a senior RAF controller at Plymouth.

At the same time as the sighting, an air vice marshall was visiting the Brixham Coast Guard station.

"We raised the subject [of the sighting] with his staff who remarked that they had never seen anything like it before," Jenkins remarked after they had seen his detailed drawing of the object

NOTES: TBP
STATUS: TBP

*DATE: April 6, 1967 TIME: 2145 MST CLASS: R ground radar/AV?
LOCATION SOURCE: University of Colorado Summary

Edmonton, Alberta Weinstein: ACER/VC, Vol. 4

Canada Hall, UFOE II, 243
RADAR DURATION: Not specified
EVALUATION: No official
University of Colorado Case #1206N
Added case: Aldrich
Initial Summary: GCA radar at the Edmonton International Airport picked up an a fast moving object at a low altitude coming from the northwest and traveling in an erratic manner. The controlers asked the pilot of Pacific Western Airlines to check on the object. He observed for a short time a dull red-orange light which vanished as the plane approached. Original source of the report was NICAP.
NOTES: TBP
STATUS: TBP
DATE: July 7 1967 TIME: evening CLASS: R ground radar

LOCATION SOURCE: Good ATS 1987 195

Kenora Airport Campagna, TUF, p96

Ontario

RADAR DURATION: 3 hours
EVALUATION: No official

PRECIS: An unidentified target was observed on a Canadian Air Traffic Control radar by three controllers and two technicians. It was on a heading towards Kenora, Ontario (about 125 miles E of Winnipeg, Manitoba). Later that evening an unidentified target was detected by Kenora Airport radar on a NE heading. It remained on scope for three hours, executing a series of manoeuvres including 180 degree turns and twice appearing to follow different Air Canada flights, before resuming its NE heading and disappearing off scope.
At 03:24 GMT an object was picked up that followed Air Canada Flight # 405 before disappearing. The return had remained on the scope for 29 minutes. The same or similar return reappeared and followed Air Canada Flight #927. It was the opinion of the radar operators that the targets were not caused by mechanical or electrical problems.

NOTES: There is no basis for any conclusion in this case without detailed information on target behaviour and presentation over the 3 hours. There appears to be no simultaneous radar or visual corroboration, and the relatedness of the two radar incidents cannot be established. Nevertheless, the prima facie report is very interesting and would appear to warrant further investigation.
*DATE: July 31, 1967 TIME: 0430Z CLASS: GV/GR
LOCATION: SOURCES:

Kernville, California
RADAR DURATION: 1 hour, 45 minutes
EVALUATIONS:
University of Colorado case #1306B
Case Added: Aldrich
Initial Summary: Mr. & Mrs. Petyak, telephone company worker observe two round star like lights bright blue in color. Radar operators at Edwards AFB RAPCON pick up targets on radar. Weather conditions: clear.
NOTES: TBP
STATUS: TBP
*DATE: August 23, 1967 TIME: 2145 CLASS: GR/AV
LOCATION: SOURCES:

Halifax, Nova Scotia
RADAR DURATION: several seconds
EVALUATIONS:

University of Colorado Case #1473N
Case Added: Aldrich
Initial Summary: One object with flashing white lights observed by commercial pilot: strange return picked up on ground radar.
NOTES: TBP
STATUS: TBP

STATUS: Insufficient information
*DATE: October 21, 1967 TIME: 6"16 A. M. CLASS: GV/GR
LOCATION: SOURCES: Project Blue Book Files

Blythewille Air Base, Hynek, UFO Report

Arkansas

RADAR DURATION:
EVALUATIONS:
Case Added: Sparks
Initial Summary: Oct. 21, 1967. Blytheville AFB, Ark. (35.96_ N, 89.95_ W). 6:16 a.m. 2 control tower operators and an observer at the S end of the runway saw 2 dark oblong table latter shaped objects with 7 ft long exhaust at about 1,200 1,500 ft height fly E to W, tracked by RAPCON radar at a distance of 2 miles, make a turn to the SW when they disappeared. (Hynek UFO Exp ch. 6, case DD 3) 15 30 secs 3 RV

NOTES: TBP
STATUS: TBP

DATE: June (?) 1968 TIME: 2300 local CLASS: R/V ground radar/ground visual

LOCATION: SOURCES: Fawcett & Greenwood 105

DMZ region,

Vietnam
RADAR DURATION: unspecified
EVALUATIONS: No official

PRECIS: According to Newsweek July 1 1968, US personnel at radar posts along the DMZ separating N and S Vietnam were reporting "dozens" of unidentified aircraft moving across the border, almost on a nightly basis. These incidents were widely characterised at the time by US and South Vietnamese official sources as incursions by "communist helicopters", and US positions along the DMZ were reinforced to counter an expected aerial assault. The assault never came, however, and subsequent official statements dismissed the incidents as "a mistake". A statement by USAF Chief of Staff General George S. Brown on October 16 1973, responding to journalists' questions about UFOs and the Air Force, is illuminating:
I don't know whether this story has ever been told or not. They weren't called UFOs. They were called enemy helicopters. And they were only seen at night and they were only seen in certain places. They were seen up around the DMZ in the early summer of '68. And this resulted in quite a little battle. And in the course of this, an Australian destroyer took a hit and we never found an enemy. We only found [out] ourselves when this had all been sorted out. This caused some shooting there and there was no enemy at all involved, but we always reacted. Always after dark. The same thing happened up at Pleiku in the Highlands in '69.
One of these incidents was documented by Newsweek reporter Robert Stokes, who was present at the Army headquarters at Dong Ha when a visual report was radioed in. Captain William Bates was the operator who took the message at about 2300. A Marine observer saw "thirteen sets of yellowish-white lights" and tracked them with an electronic telescope. They were moving west over the Ben Hai River at altitudes of between 500 and 1000 feet. When it was established that no known aircraft were in the area contact was made with radar unit Alpha 2, a northerly outpost of 1 Corps. The radar operator confirmed targets, stating that he was surrounded by blips on his scope. By 0100 Air Force and Marine jets were airborne in pursuit. At about 0145 one Marine pilot reported that he had shot down a helicopter. A reconnaisance aircraft overflew the area with infrared sensors to certify the kill but, although a "burned spot" was detected, no wreckage was found.
NOTES: The impression of radar-visual simultaneity in this report may be false, as 2 hours appear to have elapsed between the initial visual and the launching of aircraft. If radar confirmation had been positive and/or simultaneous one might expect action to have been taken more promptly. It is also impossible to conclude that the target of the interceptor engagement, occurring some 2: hours after the visual report, was related to the original sets of yellowish lights. If these lights were helicopters they could have been far away and grounded by this time. The pilot could have engaged, say, a lighted balloon in error, which would account for the lack of wreckage, or if he attempted to intercept a bright celestial body he would not be the first. The "burned spot" could have several explanations, and may even have been caused by the pilot's own wayward missile if he engaged a non-existent target. However, this is mere speculation.
The radar operator's statement that there were echoes widely distributed on his scope could be consistent with anomalous propagation of ground returns. The chief of staff's statement that other, similar incidents always occurred at night is also suggestive of anomalous propagation, which is most prevalent in stable, stratified nocturnal atmospheres and typically disappears with the onset of solar warming. Studies of propagation at two microwave bands (< 1000 MHz & <3000 MHz) show that this part of the world is in fact subject to AP conditions for more than 5% of the time most of the year (Cole 1985, pp.47-51). It is also true to say, of course, that all "UFO" reports as a class - visual or radar - show a similar circadian distribution, and correlation does not establish causation. Nevertheless, repeated incidents of large numbers of radar ghosts in a region prone to AP, and which cannot be intercepted or identified, do tend to suggest the likelihood of AP. The nature of the "thirteen sets of yellowish-white lights" initially reported in the Ben Hai River incident remains unknown, however, and the possibility remains that these phenomena could have been detected on radar.

Download 316.96 Kb.

Share with your friends: